Objective To analyze the performance of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) screening tools, examine their implementation in daily practice, and reach a consensus about the best screening tool for implementation in daily practice in different medical settings. Methods A systematic literature review (SLR), structured telephone interviews to hospitals, and a multidisciplinary nominal group meeting were all conducted. The SLR employed sensitive search strategies using Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library up to January 2020. Two reviewers independently selected articles that reported data on PsA screening tools and that included sufficient data to at least calculate the sensitivity and specificity of those tools (e.g., questionnaires, algorithms, specific questions, and biomarkers). The hospital interviews collected data regarding the process of suspected PsA diagnosis and referral to rheumatology, the implementation of PsA screening tools, and barriers and facilitators to implementation of those tools. In the nominal group meeting, a multidisciplinary team of experts discussed all these data and subsequently recommended a screening tool for implementation. Results The SLR included 41 moderate-quality studies that analyzed 14 PsA screening tools, most of which were questionnaire-based tools. All of these studies reported a moderate-good performance but presented different characteristics regarding the time to completion or the number and type of items or questions. The implementation of screening tools was low (30.5%). The experts ultimately recommended regular use of a PsA screening tool, preferably the PURE-4 questionnaire. Conclusions The implementation of PsA screening tools like the PURE-4 questionnaire in daily practice likely improves the prognosis of PsA patients.

To analyze the epidemiology, clinical features and costs of hospitalized patients with gout during the last decade in Spain. Retrospective observational study based on data from the Minimum Basic Data Set (MBDS) from the Spanish National Health Service database. Patients ≥ 18 years with any gout diagnosis at discharge who had been admitted to public or private hospitals between 2005 and 2015 were included. Patients were divided in two periods: p1 (2005–2010) and p2 (2011–2015) to compare the number of hospitalizations, mean costs and mortality rates. Data from 192,037 patients with gout was analyzed. There was an increase in the number of hospitalized patients with gout (p < 0.001). The more frequent comorbidities were diabetes (27.6% of patients), kidney disease (26.6%) and heart failure (19.3%). Liver disease (OR 2.61), dementia (OR 2.13), cerebrovascular diseases (OR 1.57), heart failure (OR 1.41), and kidney disease (OR 1.34) were associated with a higher mortality risk. Women had a lower risk of mortality than men (OR 0.85). General mortality rates in these hospitalized patients progressively increased over the years (p < 0.001). In addition, costs gradually rose, presenting a significant increase in p2 even after adjusting for inflation (p = 0.001). A progressive increase in hospitalizations, mortality rates and cost in hospitalized patients with gout was observed. This harmful trend in a preventable illness highlights the need for change and the search for new healthcare strategies.

ObjectivesTo develop a consensual definition for the term ‘early axial spondyloarthritis—axSpA’—and ‘early peripheral spondyloarthritis—pSpA’.MethodsThe ASAS (Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society-Spondyloarthritis EARly definition) steering committee convened an international working group (WG). Five consecutive steps were followed: (1) systematic literature review (SLR); (2) discussion of SLR results within the WG and ASAS community; (3) a three-round Delphi survey inviting all ASAS members to select the items that should be considered for the definition; (4) presentation of Delphi results to the WG and ASAS community and (5) ASAS voting and endorsement (2023 annual meeting).ResultsFollowing the SLR, consensus was to proceed with an expert-based definition for early axSpA (81% in favour) but not for pSpA (54% against). Importantly, early axSpA should be based on symptom duration taking solely axial symptoms into account. 151–164 ASAS members participated in the Delphi surveys. Consensus was achieved for considering the following items within early axSpA definition: duration of symptoms ≤2 years; axial symptoms defined as cervical/thoracic/back/buttock pain or morning stiffness; regardless of the presence/absence of radiographic damage. The WG agreed that in patients with a diagnosis of axSpA ‘early axSpA’ should be defined as a duration of ≤2 years of axial symptoms. Axial symptoms should include spinal/buttock pain or morning stiffness and should be considered by a rheumatologist as related to axSpA. The ASAS community endorsed this proposal (88% in favour).ConclusionsEarly axSpA has newly been defined, based on expert consensus. This ASAS definition should be adopted in research studies addressing early axSpA.

No abstract