OA05 Consensus on a core domain set for foot and ankle disorders in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: an international OMERACT Delphi consensus study

IF 4.4 2区 医学 Q1 RHEUMATOLOGY
Lara Chapman, Anthony Redmond, Toby O Smith, Caroline A Flurey, Pamela Richards, Catherine Hofstetter, Hylton B Menz, Marian Hannan, Eiman Soliman, John Arnold, Yvonne Golightly, Beverley Shea, Philip G Conaghan, Peter Tugwell, Shawna Grosskleg, Philip Helliwell, Heidi Siddle
{"title":"OA05 Consensus on a core domain set for foot and ankle disorders in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: an international OMERACT Delphi consensus study","authors":"Lara Chapman, Anthony Redmond, Toby O Smith, Caroline A Flurey, Pamela Richards, Catherine Hofstetter, Hylton B Menz, Marian Hannan, Eiman Soliman, John Arnold, Yvonne Golightly, Beverley Shea, Philip G Conaghan, Peter Tugwell, Shawna Grosskleg, Philip Helliwell, Heidi Siddle","doi":"10.1093/rheumatology/keag121.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background/Aims Foot and ankle disorders are common in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs), but there is a lack of high-quality evidence assessing the effectiveness of treatments for these disorders. A significant contributing factor is the heterogeneity of domains used across clinical trials to assess treatment effectiveness, hindering the ability to pool data in meta-analyses. The OMERACT Foot and Ankle Working Group is standardising domains to be measured and reported in all clinical trials for foot and ankle disorders in RMDs. Methods This was a modified Delphi consensus study, involving four rounds of online surveys. The first survey round consisted of a list of domains and their definitions, generated from the findings from previous literature reviews and qualitative interviews with 56 patients from eight countries. Following established OMERACT methodology, participants rated the importance of each domain on a scale of 1-9. In the second and third survey rounds, participants reviewed their own scores from the previous round alongside group responses (patients vs. HCPs/researchers), then re-rated each domain. Domain names and definitions were iteratively refined following participant feedback. Domains rated as critically important by ≥ 70% of both groups at the end of the third survey were taken into a final round, where each was rated as ‘in’ or ‘out’ of a mandatory core domain set. Circumstance-dependent core domains and domains for future consideration were agreed by the research team. Results A total of 126 participants (49 patients) from 15 countries completed all four survey rounds. The RMDs represented included rheumatoid arthritis, spondyloarthropathies, foot/ankle osteoarthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, scleroderma, gout, and localised MSK disorders (e.g. Achilles tendinopathy). Five domains (pain intensity, pain when weightbearing, physical function (activities and participation), joint movement and treatment satisfaction were rated “in” by ≥ 70% participants and proposed as core domains (mandatory for all trials), two (structural pathology, healthcare expenses) were proposed as circumstance-dependent domains, and four (gait, footwear, emotional wellbeing and sleep) were deemed important for future consideration (Table 1). Conclusion This proposed core domain set will now go through endorsement by OMERACT. Further work is needed to identify appropriate outcome measurement instruments for each core domain. Disclosure L. Chapman: None. A. Redmond: None. T.O. Smith: None. C.A. Flurey: None. P. Richards: None. C. Hofstetter: None. H.B. Menz: None. M. Hannan: None. E. Soliman: None. J. Arnold: None. Y. Golightly: None. B. Shea: None. P.G. Conaghan: Consultancies; AbbVie/Abbott, Alfasigma, Eli Lilly, Enlivex, FormatoinBio, Genascence, Grunenthal, Kolon TissueGene, Levicept, Moebius, Novartis, Orion, Pacira, Stryker, Takeda. Member of speakers’ bureau; Novartis, Moebius, Kolon TissueGene, Eli Lilly, AbbVie/Abbott. P. Tugwell: None. S. Grosskleg: None. P. Helliwell: None. H. Siddle: Honoraria; Janssen.","PeriodicalId":21255,"journal":{"name":"Rheumatology","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rheumatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/keag121.005","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/Aims Foot and ankle disorders are common in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs), but there is a lack of high-quality evidence assessing the effectiveness of treatments for these disorders. A significant contributing factor is the heterogeneity of domains used across clinical trials to assess treatment effectiveness, hindering the ability to pool data in meta-analyses. The OMERACT Foot and Ankle Working Group is standardising domains to be measured and reported in all clinical trials for foot and ankle disorders in RMDs. Methods This was a modified Delphi consensus study, involving four rounds of online surveys. The first survey round consisted of a list of domains and their definitions, generated from the findings from previous literature reviews and qualitative interviews with 56 patients from eight countries. Following established OMERACT methodology, participants rated the importance of each domain on a scale of 1-9. In the second and third survey rounds, participants reviewed their own scores from the previous round alongside group responses (patients vs. HCPs/researchers), then re-rated each domain. Domain names and definitions were iteratively refined following participant feedback. Domains rated as critically important by ≥ 70% of both groups at the end of the third survey were taken into a final round, where each was rated as ‘in’ or ‘out’ of a mandatory core domain set. Circumstance-dependent core domains and domains for future consideration were agreed by the research team. Results A total of 126 participants (49 patients) from 15 countries completed all four survey rounds. The RMDs represented included rheumatoid arthritis, spondyloarthropathies, foot/ankle osteoarthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, scleroderma, gout, and localised MSK disorders (e.g. Achilles tendinopathy). Five domains (pain intensity, pain when weightbearing, physical function (activities and participation), joint movement and treatment satisfaction were rated “in” by ≥ 70% participants and proposed as core domains (mandatory for all trials), two (structural pathology, healthcare expenses) were proposed as circumstance-dependent domains, and four (gait, footwear, emotional wellbeing and sleep) were deemed important for future consideration (Table 1). Conclusion This proposed core domain set will now go through endorsement by OMERACT. Further work is needed to identify appropriate outcome measurement instruments for each core domain. Disclosure L. Chapman: None. A. Redmond: None. T.O. Smith: None. C.A. Flurey: None. P. Richards: None. C. Hofstetter: None. H.B. Menz: None. M. Hannan: None. E. Soliman: None. J. Arnold: None. Y. Golightly: None. B. Shea: None. P.G. Conaghan: Consultancies; AbbVie/Abbott, Alfasigma, Eli Lilly, Enlivex, FormatoinBio, Genascence, Grunenthal, Kolon TissueGene, Levicept, Moebius, Novartis, Orion, Pacira, Stryker, Takeda. Member of speakers’ bureau; Novartis, Moebius, Kolon TissueGene, Eli Lilly, AbbVie/Abbott. P. Tugwell: None. S. Grosskleg: None. P. Helliwell: None. H. Siddle: Honoraria; Janssen.
风湿病和肌肉骨骼疾病足部和踝关节疾病核心领域的共识:一项国际OMERACT德尔菲共识研究
背景/目的足部和踝关节疾病在风湿病和肌肉骨骼疾病(RMDs)中很常见,但缺乏高质量的证据来评估这些疾病的治疗效果。一个重要的影响因素是临床试验中用于评估治疗效果的领域的异质性,这阻碍了荟萃分析中汇集数据的能力。OMERACT足部和踝关节工作组正在标准化rmd足部和踝关节疾病的所有临床试验中测量和报告的领域。方法采用改进的德尔菲共识研究,包括四轮在线调查。第一轮调查包括一系列领域及其定义,这些领域和定义是根据以前的文献综述和对来自8个国家的56名患者的定性访谈得出的。根据既定的OMERACT方法,参与者对每个领域的重要性进行1-9的评分。在第二轮和第三轮调查中,参与者回顾了他们自己在前一轮调查中的得分以及小组反应(患者vs. HCPs/研究人员),然后重新评估每个领域。根据参与者的反馈,对域名和定义进行了迭代改进。在第三次调查结束时,两组中均有70%以上的人认为至关重要的域被纳入最后一轮,其中每个域被评为强制性核心域集的“内”或“外”。环境相关的核心领域和未来考虑的领域得到了研究团队的同意。结果来自15个国家的126名参与者(49名患者)完成了所有4轮调查。rmd包括类风湿关节炎、脊椎关节病、足/踝关节骨关节炎、系统性红斑狼疮、硬皮病、痛风和局部MSK疾病(如跟腱病)。5个领域(疼痛强度、负重疼痛、身体功能(活动和参与)、关节运动和治疗满意度)被≥70%的参与者评为“在”,并被提议为核心领域(所有试验都是强制性的),2个(结构病理学、医疗费用)被提议为环境依赖领域,4个(步态、鞋类、情绪健康和睡眠)被认为是未来考虑的重要领域(表1)。这个提议的核心域名集现在将通过OMERACT的认可。需要进一步的工作来为每个核心领域确定适当的结果测量工具。L.查普曼:没有。雷德蒙德:没有。T.O.史密斯:没有。C.A.弗鲁里:没有。P. Richards:没有。C. Hofstetter:没有。门兹:没有。汉南:没有。索利曼:没有。J.阿诺德:没有。Y.戈莱特利:没有。谢伊:没有。P.G. Conaghan:咨询;AbbVie/Abbott、Alfasigma、Eli Lilly、Enlivex、FormatoinBio、Genascence、Grunenthal、Kolon TissueGene、Levicept、Moebius、Novartis、Orion、Pacira、Stryker、武田。发言人主席团成员;诺华、莫比乌斯、科隆组织基因、礼来、艾伯维/雅培。P. Tugwell:没有。S. Grosskleg:没有。P.海利韦尔:没有。H. Siddle: Honoraria;詹森。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Rheumatology
Rheumatology 医学-风湿病学
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
7.30%
发文量
1091
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Rheumatology strives to support research and discovery by publishing the highest quality original scientific papers with a focus on basic, clinical and translational research. The journal’s subject areas cover a wide range of paediatric and adult rheumatological conditions from an international perspective. It is an official journal of the British Society for Rheumatology, published by Oxford University Press. Rheumatology publishes original articles, reviews, editorials, guidelines, concise reports, meta-analyses, original case reports, clinical vignettes, letters and matters arising from published material. The journal takes pride in serving the global rheumatology community, with a focus on high societal impact in the form of podcasts, videos and extended social media presence, and utilizing metrics such as Altmetric. Keep up to date by following the journal on Twitter @RheumJnl.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书