Consensus statement of the Spanish Society of Rheumatology on the management of biologic therapies in psoriatic arthritis

Sueiro, José Luis Fernández; Roura, Xavier; Crespillo, Juan de Dios Cañete; Alonso, Juan Carlos; Vicuña, Rosario García de; Queiró, Rubén; Ariza, Rafael Ariza; Gualda, Enrique Batllé; Santamaría, Estibaliz Loza

doi:10.1016/s2173-5743(11)70038-7

Cited by 9 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, there is no unanimous consensus on the concept of agreement or disagreement, and a review of the literature shows considerable variability in the criteria applied. In some reports, a Likert scale from 0 to 5 is used, while in others the scale runs from 0 to 7 or 9 to 10 . Other formats have included questions with a simple yes/no response, questions in which participants were asked to rank a series of options in the order of preference, and questions where the participants provide free‐text answers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In some reports, a Likert scale from 0 to 5 is used, 2,3 while in others the scale runs from 0 to 7 4 or 9 to 10. [5][6][7][8][9][10][11] Other formats have included questions with a simple yes/ no response, questions in which participants were asked to rank a series of options in the order of preference, and questions where the participants provide free-text answers. The concept of agreement is not always clearly defined.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2,3 Sometimes, an overall definition of agreement is sought, agreement is graded (e.g. strong agreement), strong consensus on a specific item requires the vote of at least 90% of the participants (regarded as 'agreement'), [12][13][14][15] or consensus is defined when ≥70% of participants 4,7,10 or ≥75% of participants 5 score within the 6-7 4 or 7-9 range 5,7,10 on the scale. Consensus may also be considered to have been reached for a text when at least a simple consensus on a certain item has been reached (i.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Consensus document on the evaluation and treatment of moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis: Psoriasis Group of the Spanish Academy of Dermatology and Venereology

Daudén

Puig

Ferrándiz

et al. 2016

Acad Dermatol Venereol

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Psoriasis is a highly prevalent disease with a major impact on quality of life; therefore, appropriate patient management is mandatory. Given that many issues in psoriasis are controversial and not clearly defined by evidence-based medicine, management of psoriasis is very variable. Expert consensus can generate practical guidelines for optimization of patient care. Much has changed since 2009, when the Consensus Document on the Evaluation and Treatment of Moderate to Severe Psoriasis was published by the Spanish Psoriasis Group (GEP) of the Spanish Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (AEDV). The objective of the present consensus document is to provide the dermatologist with updated recommendations for the evaluation and treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe plaque psoriasis. All active members of the GEP of the AEDV were invited to participate in the survey. The final group comprised 46 members from various areas of Spain and with substantial experience in managing psoriasis. A 3-round Delphi process was used to reach consensus. Consistent agreement and consistent disagreement (consensus) required the achievement of at least two of the following three criteria: Criterion 1, which was based on the position occupied by the mean on a scale of 1-9 and an SD <2; Criterion 2, which was based on the median and interquartile range (IQR) on a scale of 1-9; Criterion 3, which considered the percentage of the voting experts on a scale of 1-9. The items studied were definition of severity, therapeutic objectives, indications for systemic treatment and biologic therapy, induction and maintenance periods, therapeutic failure, loss of response, relapse and rebound, continuous and intermittent therapy, screening of patients before treatment, adherence to therapy, follow-up of treatment outcome, combination of drugs, transitioning and associated comorbidities. Consistent agreement or disagreement (consensus) was achieved for 198 items (agreement, 3 criteria 146 items, 2 criteria 43 items; disagreement, 3 criteria 9 items, 2 criteria 0 items) based on the criteria described above. Completion of the Delphi consensus process enabled a broad and experienced group of Spanish psoriasis experts to provide useful and practical guidelines for the management and treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, particularly in areas where evidence is lacking.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Consensus document on the evaluation and treatment of moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis: Psoriasis Group of the Spanish Academy of Dermatology and Venereology

Daudén

Puig

Ferrándiz

et al. 2016

Acad Dermatol Venereol

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Standards of care and quality indicators for multidisciplinary care models for psoriatic arthritis in Spain

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To define and give priority to standards of care and quality indicators of multidisciplinary care for patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA). A systematic literature review on PsA standards of care and quality indicators was performed. An expert panel of rheumatologists and dermatologists who provide multidisciplinary care was established. In a consensus meeting group, the experts discussed and developed the standards of care and quality indicators and graded their priority, agreement and also the feasibility (only for quality indicators) following qualitative methodology and a Delphi process. Afterwards, these results were discussed with 2 focus groups, 1 with patients, another with health managers. A descriptive analysis is presented. We obtained 25 standards of care (9 of structure, 9 of process, 7 of results) and 24 quality indicators (2 of structure, 5 of process, 17 of results). Standards of care include relevant aspects in the multidisciplinary care of PsA patients like an appropriate physical infrastructure and technical equipment, the access to nursing care, labs and imaging techniques, other health professionals and treatments, or the development of care plans. Regarding quality indicators, the definition of multidisciplinary care model objectives and referral criteria, the establishment of responsibilities and coordination among professionals and the active evaluation of patients and data collection were given a high priority. Patients considered all of them as important. This set of standards of care and quality indicators for the multidisciplinary care of patients with PsA should help improve quality of care in these patients.

show abstract

Comparison between full and tapered dosages of biologic therapies in psoriatic arthritis patients: clinical and ultrasound assessment

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The primary objective of this study was to describe and compare clinical and musculoskeletal (MS) ultrasound (US) features between psoriatic arthritis (PsA) patients treated with full and tapered dosage of biologic (b) disease-modified antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs). The secondary objective was to compare clinical and MSUS features between PsA patients treated with bDMARDs with and without concomitant synthetic (s) DMARDs. We evaluated 102 patients with PsA treated with bDMARDs. The bDMARD dosage tapering had been made in patients with a maintained remission or minimal disease activity (MDA) according to their attending rheumatologist and with the patient acceptance. The bDMARD tapering consisted of the following: increase the interval between doses for subcutaneous bDMARDs or reduction of the dose for intravenous bDMARDs. The clinical evaluation consisted of a dermatologic and rheumatologic assessment of disease activity. The presence of B-mode and Doppler synovitis, tenosynovitis, enthesopathy, and paratenonitis was investigated by a rheumatologist blinded to drug dosage, clinical assessments, and laboratory results. Seventy-four (72.5 %) patients received full dosage of bDMARDs and 28 (27.5 %) received tapered dosage. The duration with biologic therapy and with current biologic therapy was significantly higher in patients with tapered dosages (p = 0.008 and p = 0.001, respectively). We found no significant differences between clinical, laboratory, and US variables, both for BM and CD between patients with full and tapered dosage and between patients with and without concomitant sDMARD. Clinical assessment, MSUS variables, and MDA status are similar in patients receiving full and tapered dosage of bDMARDs.

show abstract

Consensus statement of the Spanish Society of Rheumatology on the management of biologic therapies in psoriatic arthritis

Cited by 9 publications

References 74 publications

Consensus document on the evaluation and treatment of moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis: Psoriasis Group of the Spanish Academy of Dermatology and Venereology

Consensus document on the evaluation and treatment of moderate‐to‐severe psoriasis: Psoriasis Group of the Spanish Academy of Dermatology and Venereology

Standards of care and quality indicators for multidisciplinary care models for psoriatic arthritis in Spain

Comparison between full and tapered dosages of biologic therapies in psoriatic arthritis patients: clinical and ultrasound assessment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About