Objective To update evidence‐based recommendations for the treatment of patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and nonradiographic axial spondyloarthritis (SpA). Methods We conducted updated systematic literature reviews for 20 clinical questions on pharmacologic treatment addressed in the 2015 guidelines, and for 26 new questions on pharmacologic treatment, treat‐to‐target strategy, and use of imaging. New questions addressed the use of secukinumab, ixekizumab, tofacitinib, tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) biosimilars, and biologic tapering/discontinuation, among others. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology to assess the quality of evidence and formulate recommendations and required at least 70% agreement among the voting panel. Results Recommendations for AS and nonradiographic axial SpA are similar. TNFi are recommended over secukinumab or ixekizumab as the first biologic to be used. Secukinumab or ixekizumab is recommended over the use of a second TNFi in patients with primary nonresponse to the first TNFi. TNFi, secukinumab, and ixekizumab are favored over tofacitinib. Co‐administration of low‐dose methotrexate with TNFi is not recommended, nor is a strict treat‐to‐target strategy or discontinuation or tapering of biologics in patients with stable disease. Sulfasalazine is recommended only for persistent peripheral arthritis when TNFi are contraindicated. For patients with unclear disease activity, spine or pelvis magnetic resonance imaging could aid assessment. Routine monitoring of radiographic changes with serial spine radiographs is not recommended. Conclusion These recommendations provide updated guidance regarding use of new medications and imaging of the axial skeleton in the management of AS and nonradiographic axial SpA.

Objective To update evidence‐based recommendations for the treatment of patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and nonradiographic axial spondyloarthritis (SpA). Methods We conducted updated systematic literature reviews for 20 clinical questions on pharmacologic treatment addressed in the 2015 guidelines, and for 26 new questions on pharmacologic treatment, treat‐to‐target strategy, and use of imaging. New questions addressed the use of secukinumab, ixekizumab, tofacitinib, tumor necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) biosimilars, and biologic tapering/discontinuation, among others. We used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology to assess the quality of evidence and formulate recommendations and required at least 70% agreement among the voting panel. Results Recommendations for AS and nonradiographic axial SpA are similar. TNFi are recommended over secukinumab or ixekizumab as the first biologic to be used. Secukinumab or ixekizumab is recommended over the use of a second TNFi in patients with primary nonresponse to the first TNFi. TNFi, secukinumab, and ixekizumab are favored over tofacitinib. Co‐administration of low‐dose methotrexate with TNFi is not recommended, nor is a strict treat‐to‐target strategy or discontinuation or tapering of biologics in patients with stable disease. Sulfasalazine is recommended only for persistent peripheral arthritis when TNFi are contraindicated. For patients with unclear disease activity, spine or pelvis magnetic resonance imaging could aid assessment. Routine monitoring of radiographic changes with serial spine radiographs is not recommended. Conclusion These recommendations provide updated guidance regarding use of new medications and imaging of the axial skeleton in the management of AS and nonradiographic axial SpA.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Objective. To describe leflunomide (LEF) use in a national cohort of 3,325 veterans. Methods. Prescriptions for LEF and 9 disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs written between October 1998 and June 2001 at all Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers were obtained from VA national databases. Results. LEF was initiated with a loading dose of 100 mg daily for 3 days in 61% of patients, and 42% of patients discontinued LEF. LEF was more likely to be discontinued if a 3-day 100-mg loading dose was prescribed, patients were younger than 44 years or older than 75 years, or reported an annual family income <$60,000. Review of medical records of 291 discontinuers revealed that the most common reasons for discontinuation were inefficacy (30%), gastrointestinal symptoms (29%), medication noncompliance or lost to followup (14%), and elevated liver enzymes (5%). Conclusion. LEF is relatively safe in clinical practice. The VA's national databases provide an excellent, inexpensive resource for postmarketing evaluation of rheumatologic medications.

Objective. To determine present practice for the management of glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis (GIOP) in veterans; to characterize provider knowledge, beliefs, and practice behaviors regarding management of GIOP; and to identify potential barriers and interventions in the management of GIOP. Methods. To characterize current management of GIOP in an academic veterans administration medical center, we conducted a retrospective chart review of 100 patients who were prescribed a 90-day supply of prednisone. To assess clinicians' knowledge of GIOP clinical guidelines and perceptions of GIOP management, primary care clinicians and subspecialists completed a questionnaire and participated in focus groups. Results. Chart review revealed that only 32 of 100 patients receiving long-term glucocorticoid treatment underwent bone mineral density testing, and only 32 patients were prescribed the recommended calcium supplements. Of the 23 providers who completed the questionnaire and participated in the focus groups, 4 correctly identified both the dose and duration of glucocorticoid use at which GIOP prevention measures should be instituted. Common GIOP management barriers cited by participants were lack of knowledge, having limited time during the clinic visit to address all problems, patient nonadherence, and system problems. The most commonly mentioned potential interventions were the use of computerized clinical reminders and patient education. Conclusion. Clinicians frequently do not follow recommended guidelines for the management of GIOP. Improving the management of GIOP will likely require a fundamental redesigning of care processes for this disorder in order to overcome provider, patient-related, and system barriers.

Falls are currently a leading cause of death from injury in the elderly. The usage of the conventional assistive cane devices is critical in reducing the risk of falls and is relied upon by over 4 million patients in the U.S.. While canes provide physical support as well as supplementary sensing feedback to patients, at the same time, these conventional aids also exhibit serious adverse effects that contribute to falls. The falls due to the improper usage of the canes are particularly acute in the elderly and disabled where reduced cognitive capacity accompanied by the burden of managing cane motion leads to increased risk. This paper describes the development of the SmartCane assistive system that encompasses broad engineering challenges that will impact general development of individualized, robust assistive and prosthetic devices. The SmartCane system combines advances in signal processing, embedded computing, and wireless networking technology to provide capabilities for remote monitoring, local signal processing, and real-time feedback on the cane usage. This system aims to reduce risks of injuries and falls by enabling training and guidance of patients in proper usage of assistive devices.