How well are the ASAS/OMERACT Core Outcome Sets for Ankylosing Spondylitis implemented in randomized clinical trials? A systematic literature review
- 538 Downloads
This study aims to investigate how well the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS)/Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials (OMERACT) core set and response criteria for ankylosing spondylitis (AS) have been implemented in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions. A systematic literature search was performed up to June 2013 looking for RCTs in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) (AS and non-radiographic axial SpA). The assessed domains and instruments belonging to the core sets for disease-controlling anti-rheumatic therapy (DC-ART) and symptom-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (SMARDs) were extracted. Results were reported separately for those trials published until 2 years after the publication of the core set (1 April 2001; ‘control trials’) and those trials published at least 2 years after the publication date (‘implementation trials’). One hundred twenty-three articles from 99 RCTs were included in the analysis, comparing 48 ‘control trials’ and 51 ‘implementation trials’. Regarding DC-ART core set, the following domains were significantly more frequently assessed in the ‘implementation group’ in comparison to the ‘control group’: ‘physical function’ (100 vs 41.7 %; p ≤ 0.001), ‘peripheral joints/entheses’ (100 vs 33.3 %; p ≤ 0.001) and ‘fatigue’ (100 vs 0 %; p ≤ 0.001). Three instruments were significantly more used in the ‘implementation group’: Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI) (100 vs 8.3 %; p = ≤ 0.001), CRP (92.3 vs 58.3 %; p = 0.01) and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Metrology Index (BASMI) (53.8 vs 0 %; p = 0.001). Regarding SMARD core set domains, physical function (92 vs 23 %; p ≤ 0.001) and fatigue (84 vs 17 %; p ≤ 0.001), as well as the instruments BASFI (88 vs 14 %; p ≤ 0.001) and BASMI (52 vs 0 %; p ≤ 0.001), increased significantly in the ‘implementation group’. Twenty per cent of trials from the ‘implementation group’ but none from the ‘control group’ included all domains of the core set. In conclusion, this study provides evidence for the implementation of the ASAS/OMERACT core set in RCTs of both DC-ART and SMARD. This applies to the use of the domains and, to a lesser extent, to the specific instruments.
KeywordsAnkylosing spondylitis Core outcome set Randomized controlled trial
The authors would like to thank Prof. Ernst Feldtkeller for the collaboration in collecting many papers. Wilson Bautista-Molano was supported by an ASAS Fellowship. Victoria Navarro-Compán was partially supported by a grant from the Fundación Española de Reumatología.
Conflict of interest
All authors declare no conflict of interest.
- 4.van der Heijde D, Calin A, Dougados M et al (1999) Selection of instruments in the core set for DC-ART, SMARD, physical therapy, and clinical record keeping in ankylosing spondylitis. Progress report of the ASAS working group assessments in ankylosing spondylitis. J Rheumatol 26:951–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.Cash JM. Evaluation of the patient: history and physical examination. In: Klippel JH, editor. Primer on the rheumatic diseases. Atlanta: Arthritis Foundation; 1997 p. 92Google Scholar