Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • First Release
    • Current
    • Archives
    • Collections
    • Audiovisual Rheum
    • COVID-19 and Rheumatology
  • Resources
    • Guide for Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Payment
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Classified Ads
    • Reprints and Translations
    • Permissions
    • Meetings
    • FAQ
    • Policies
  • Subscribers
    • Subscription Information
    • Purchase Subscription
    • Your Account
    • Terms and Conditions
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Letter from the Editor
    • Duncan A. Gordon Award
    • Privacy/GDPR Policy
    • Accessibility
  • Contact Us
  • JRheum Supplements
  • Services

User menu

  • My Cart
  • Log In

Search

  • Advanced search
The Journal of Rheumatology
  • JRheum Supplements
  • Services
  • My Cart
  • Log In
The Journal of Rheumatology

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • First Release
    • Current
    • Archives
    • Collections
    • Audiovisual Rheum
    • COVID-19 and Rheumatology
  • Resources
    • Guide for Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Payment
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Classified Ads
    • Reprints and Translations
    • Permissions
    • Meetings
    • FAQ
    • Policies
  • Subscribers
    • Subscription Information
    • Purchase Subscription
    • Your Account
    • Terms and Conditions
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Letter from the Editor
    • Duncan A. Gordon Award
    • Privacy/GDPR Policy
    • Accessibility
  • Contact Us
  • Follow jrheum on Twitter
  • Visit jrheum on Facebook
  • Follow jrheum on LinkedIn
  • Follow jrheum on YouTube
  • Follow jrheum on Instagram
  • Follow jrheum on RSS
Research ArticleRheumatoid Arthritis

Pain and Self-reported Swollen Joints Are Main Drivers of Patient-reported Flares in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results from a 12-month Observational Study

Dorota Kuettel, Jette Primdahl, Ulrich Weber, Lene Terslev, Mikkel Østergaard, Randi Petersen, Andreas Kristian Pedersen, Sören Möller and Kim Hørslev-Petersen
The Journal of Rheumatology September 2020, 47 (9) 1305-1313; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.190760
Dorota Kuettel
From the Danish Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Sønderborg; Institute of Regional Health Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense; Hospital of Southern Jutland, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Aabenraa; Copenhagen Center for Arthritis Research (COPECARE), Center for Rheumatology and Spine Diseases, Rigshospitalet – Glostrup, Glostrup; Open Patient data Explorative Network (OPEN), Odense University Hospital and Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Dorota Kuettel
  • For correspondence: Dkuttel@danskgigthospital.dk dkuettel@health.sdu.dk
Jette Primdahl
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Jette Primdahl
Ulrich Weber
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Ulrich Weber
Lene Terslev
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mikkel Østergaard
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Mikkel Østergaard
Randi Petersen
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Randi Petersen
Andreas Kristian Pedersen
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sören Möller
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Sören Möller
Kim Hørslev-Petersen
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Kim Hørslev-Petersen
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
  • eLetters
PreviousNext
Loading

Abstract

Objective. To examine prospectively self-reported flare characteristics and their longitudinal association with disease activity and patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods. Consecutive RA patients with 28-joint count Disease Activity Score based on C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) < 3.2 and no swollen joints were examined at baseline, Month 6, and Month 12. Assessments included joint counts, DAS28-CRP, visual analog scale–evaluator’s global assessment (EGA), and PRO. Every third month, patients completed the Flare Assessment in Rheumatoid Arthritis and RA Flare Questionnaire, and disclosed self-management strategies. Flaring and non-flaring patients were compared and longitudinal associations between self-reported flare status (yes/no) and disease activity, PRO, and treatment escalation were explored.

Results. Among 80 patients with RA [74% females, mean (SD) age 63 (10) yrs, disease duration 11 (7) yrs, and baseline DAS28-CRP 1.9 (0.6)], 64 (80%) reported flare at least once during 12 months. Fifty-five percent of flares lasted less than 1 week. Common self-management strategies were analgesics (50%) and restricted activities (38%). Patients who reported being in flare had consistently higher disease activity measures and PRO compared to patients without flare. In a partly adjusted model, all flare domains, patient-reported swollen and tender joint counts and disease activity measures were associated with flares. In fully adjusted analyses, present flare was independently associated with pain (OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.34–2.60), patient-reported swollen joints (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.03–1.36), and higher EGA (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.04–1.28). Treatment escalation was associated with present flare (p ≤ 0.001).

Conclusion. In RA, self-reported flares were frequent, mainly managed by analgesics, substantiated by higher disease activity measures, independently associated with pain and patient-reported swollen joints, and related to treatment escalation.

Key Indexing Terms:
  • RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS
  • PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES
  • FLARES

Treatment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) aims at sustained remission or low disease activity (LDA)1. Owing to major advances in the treatment of RA in the last decades, these therapeutic objectives are realistic goals for many patients2. However, patients who have reached remission or LDA may still experience flares3,4. These fluctuations in disease activity are strongly associated with poor clinical outcomes, may lead to progression of radiographic joint damage and impaired function, and accelerate cardiovascular (CV) comorbidity5,6,7,8.

Following the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) overarching principles for the treatment of patients with RA, shared decision making between the patient and the rheumatologist is a cardinal feature in disease management1. Hence, it is essential to integrate the patient’s perspective into the flare definition. The concept of patient-reported flares has emerged as a major determinant in the disease trajectory with substantial effect on everyday life activities9,10,11, and has been linked to functional impairment4. It is well established that patient-reported flares differ from one patient to another regarding duration, frequency, and symptom severity3,12.

More recent international initiatives culminated in standardization of definition and measurement tools of flares13,14,15,16. Two questionnaires incorporating patient perspectives were developed in parallel; both aimed to identify flare domains that patients and health professionals considered important to be included in a measure of flare. The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) RA Flare Group has developed the RA Flare Questionnaire (RA-FQ) and has defined RA flares as “episodes of increased RA disease activity accompanied by a cluster of symptoms of sufficient intensity and duration to require initiation of, change, or increase in therapy”13,16,17,18. A French group developed a self-administered instrument, the Flare Assessment in Rheumatoid Arthritis (FLARE-RA), to detect fluctuations in disease activity between rheumatology visits19. Both questionnaires have been validated in patients with RA14,20,21. However, a threshold for flare detection was not established at the initiation of the study for both questionnaires. Flare domains have been shown to correlate with other patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measuring similar features when analyzed cross-sectionally14,18,21. Previous studies have addressed the predictors of clinical flares defined by the Disease Activity Score (DAS) flare definition7,22. Yet evidence is sparse regarding the relationship between clinical disease activity measures and flare domains upon patient-defined flare status and regarding clinical predictors and potential drivers of self-reported flares.

The objectives of our study were to describe characteristics and self-management strategies of self-reported flares in anticitrullinated peptide antibody (anti-CCP)–and/or rheumatoid factor (RF)-positive RA patients; to assess associations between self-reported present flare, other PRO, and clinical disease activity; and to investigate whether self- reported present flare is associated with escalation of medical treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study design and participants

The FLARA study (FLAre-in-RA) is a prospective 1-year observational single-center study, where consecutive patients with RA were recruited from the outpatient clinic at the Danish Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases between August 2016 and June 2017.

Patients ≥ 18 years were eligible if they fulfilled the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 1987 or ACR/EULAR 2010 criteria for RA23,24, were RF- and/or anti-CCP–positive, had a 28-joint count DAS based on C-reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) < 3.2 and no clinically detectable swollen joints at baseline. Further requirements were stable disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) treatment and no intraarticular glucocorticoid injections in the last 4 weeks prior to study entry.

The FLARA study was supported by the local patient research board and 1 member participated as a patient research partner. The study was approved by the regional ethics committee (The Regional Scientific Ethical Committees for Southern Denmark, S-20160027), and was conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki 2013. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Patient-reported flare definition

The flares were divided into present or past flare in relation to the time of completing the questionnaire. Present flare was assessed from the patient perspective by the anchor question: “Are you experiencing a flare of your RA at this time?” (yes/no) and this definition was considered the primary outcome of self-reported flare throughout the entire study.

Flare questionnaires and supplementary flare questions

Patients who reported to be in a flare, rated the flare severity on an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS) and the flare duration (1–3, 4–7, 8–14, or > 14 days). Moreover, patients completed the RA-FQ consisting of 5 questions assessing pain, physical function, fatigue, stiffness, and participation over the past week on an NRS from 0 (none) to 10 (severe)14,20. A sum score across all items was calculated, ranging from 0 to 50. Further, patients indicated tender and swollen joints on a manikin sketch.

Past flares were identified by the question: “In the last three months (or at some time since the last visit): Do you think your RA has had a flare?” Response options were as follows: no; yes, once; and yes, more than once. This flare definition was applied to standardize the assessment of flare frequency during 1 year of followup but was not used as an outcome in any of the main analyses investigating associations between flare and other variables. Patients completed the FLARE-RA, consisting of 12 questions, and the total score was calculated, as the mean across all items, ranging from 0 (no flare) to 10 (maximum flare)25,26.

Patients who reported either past or present flares completed supplementary questions as proposed by the OMERACT RA Flare Group about flare self-management strategies such as using analgesics, reducing activities, avoiding activities, behavioral approaches, using glucocorticoids, and calling the rheumatology clinic for help15,27,28.

Patients completed the flare questionnaires when attending clinical visits at baseline, Month 6, and Month 12 after baseline, while at months 3 and 9, the questionnaires were either mailed electronically or sent as a hard copy, according to patients’ preferences. A text message reminder was sent to all patients.

Other PRO

At the clinical visits at baseline, Month 6, and Month 12, participants were asked to complete visual analog scales (VAS) for pain, fatigue, and patient’s global assessment (0–100). The Danish version of the Health Assessment Questionnaire was applied to assess physical function29.

Clinical and laboratory assessments

In accordance with the EULAR recommendations for a core dataset to support observational research, these were recorded at baseline: age, sex, disease duration, ongoing pharmacological therapy for RA, weight, height, and selected comorbidities (diabetes, hypertension, CV diseases, depression, osteoarthritis, cancer)30.

At baseline, and months 6 and 12 after baseline, a rheumatologist or a rheumatology nurse carried out a clinical examination for a swollen and tender count in 28 joints (SJC28 and TJC28, respectively), CRP was collected, and DAS28-CRP was calculated. Evaluator’s global assessment (EGA) was assessed by a VAS 0–100. The patients were tested for IgM-RF and anti-CCP positivity at baseline.

Escalation of medical treatment

The escalation of medical treatment was assessed at Month 6 and Month 12 and was defined as follows: initiation of or added and/or increased dosage of conventional DMARD (cDMARD), biological DMARD (bDMARD), or steroids, likewise treated as a binary variable (yes/no).

Statistical analysis

Descriptive statistics were presented as frequencies with percentages for categorical variables, and as means with SD for continuous variables. Self-management strategies in relation to flares were described. Depending on data distribution, parametric (2 sample t tests) or non-parametric (Wilcoxon rank-sum test) analyses were used to compare patients reporting present flare versus not in present flare. We used Fisher’s exact test to investigate the differences between treatment escalation and self-reported flare status.

We were dealing with repeated measurements on the same subjects. Thus mixed-effects logistic regression analyses were used, with subject as a random effect, to analyze associations at all timepoints simultaneously. The analyses were performed with present flare status as a binary dependent variable and the following exploratory variables: disease activity measures (SJC28, TJC28, CRP, EGA). Likewise, the analyses were performed between present flare status and the following PRO: flare domains from RA-FQ (pain, function, fatigue, stiffness, and participation) and patient-reported swollen joints and tender joints. For the clinical explanatory variables, 3 timepoints corresponding to clinical visits were used in the analyses, while for PRO, all 5 timepoints were used.

Our analyses followed a 2-step approach: first analyses with a partly adjusted and subsequently fully adjusted model. In the partly adjusted model, we included 1 explanatory variable at a time, while we included all explanatory variables simultaneously in the fully adjusted model to elucidate the independent associations. We considered age, sex, disease duration at baseline, and comorbidities as potential confounders and included them as covariates in both the partly and the fully adjusted models. Comorbidities were categorized into 3 categories: none, 1, and more than 1. To account for the time-varying variable, time (timepoints for clinical visits/patients’ reports) was treated as a categorical variable and was included in all models.

For all analyses, we reported adjusted OR estimates with 95% CI. A 95% CI excluding 1 was considered statistically significant (i.e., p < 0.05). All analyses were carried out using Stata version 15.0 (StataCorp.).

RESULTS

Eighty RA patients with mean (SD) disease duration of 11 (7) years were included. Demographic and baseline characteristics are shown in Table 1. Mean (SD) age was 63 (10) years, 74% were female, and baseline DAS28-CRP 1.9 (0.6). Patients had low levels of self-reported disease activity, only 18/80 (23%) patients had pain (VAS) above 30 mm. The majority of patients (66/80, 82%) were receiving cDMARD, 41/80 (51%) received 2 concomitant cDMARD while none was on triple therapy. Comorbidities were common: hypertension 23/80 (29%), osteoarthritis (OA) 21/80 (26%), depression 9/80 (11%), diabetes 8/80 (10%), other CV diseases 3/80 (4%), and malignancies 4/80 (5%).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Baseline characteristics of 80 patients included in the study.

Numbers of patients at each followup timepoint were 80 (100%) at 3 months, 79 (99%) at 6 months, and 78 (97.5%) at 9- and 12-month followups.

Flare characteristics

The patients completed 385 (96%) of the RA-FQ and 379 (95%) of the FLARE-RA questionnaires. Eighty percent (64/80) of the patients reported to have experienced a flare during the 12 months’ followup. Thirty-six percent (29/80) reported present flare and 71% (57/80) reported past flare at least once during 12 months. The number of present flares ranged between 1 (18 patients) and 4 (1 patient), with a mean (SD) of 1.55 (0.82) per patient. The majority of present flares (40%) had lasted 1–3 days, 15% had lasted 4–7 days, 18% remained for 8–14 days, and 27% lasted longer than 2 weeks when completing the questionnaires. The mean (SD) flare severity was 4.9 (3.0).

Metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints were most frequently reported as being swollen or tender at the time of flares (Table 2).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Number of patients reporting swollen/tender joints across all visits when reporting flare.

Self-management strategies

Patients managed their flares through a wide variety of strategies, the most common being the use of analgesics (50%) and to reduce activities (38%). Avoiding activities and behavioral approaches (massage, attending physical therapy, exercise, applying warm/cold pack) were used in 23% and 19% of patients reporting a flare, respectively. Only a minority (15%) of the patients did not change their behavior (i.e., did not do anything differently) when they experienced a flare. The least common strategies were to call their rheumatologist/rheumatology nurse for help (11%) or to take glucocorticoids (3%). However, when reporting prolonged flares > 14 days at Month 3 and Month 9, four out of 5 patients contacted the outpatient clinic for help, which resulted in treatment escalation in 3 patients.

Comparison of patients in present flare versus not in present flare

Patients reporting present flare had higher clinical disease activity measures and higher levels of PRO, including both flare questionnaires, than patients currently not in flare. Table 3 shows the differences by flare status in variables collected at the clinical visits, while Table 4 presents differences in PRO collected every third month. All differences between flaring and non-flaring patients were statistically significant except for CRP, and fatigue at Month 6 and Month 9 (Table 3 and Table 4).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3.

Characteristics of flaring versus non-flaring patients* at 6 and 12 months’ followup.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 4.

Patient-reported outcomes in flaring vs non-flaring* patients across all followup timepoints.

Change scores from baseline to clinical visit were higher for flaring patients compared to non-flaring patients at Month 6 and Month 12, respectively (Appendix 1).

Associations across all clinical visits between self-reported present flare and measures of disease activity

Present flare was longitudinally associated with higher disease activity measures: SJC28, TJC28, CRP, and EGA in the partly adjusted model as illustrated in Table 5. In the fully adjusted model, only EGA was significantly associated with present flare with adjusted OR (95% CI) of 1.15 (1.04–1.28, p < 0.01).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 5.

Mixed-effects logistic regression examining associations across all timepoints* with self-reported present flare as outcome variable.

Associations across all timepoints between self-reported present flare and PRO

Present flare was significantly associated with all RA-FQ flare domains, as well as with patient-reported tender and swollen joints, in the partly adjusted model (all p values < 0.001; Table 5). In the fully adjusted model, only pain and patient-reported swollen joints remained significantly associated with present flare [adjusted OR 1.85 (95% CI 1.34–2.60), p < 0.001; and 1.18 (95% CI 1.03–1.36), p < 0.05, respectively].

Associations with escalation of medical treatment at Month 6 and Month 12

At Month 6, 63% of flaring patients and 8% of non-flaring patients (p = 0.001), and at Month 12, 60% of flaring patients and 6% of non-flaring patients (p < 0.0001), were intensified in medical treatment (Table 6). None of the changes were induced by side effects.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 6.

Escalation from previous visit in antirheumatic treatment by flare status.

DISCUSSION

Our prospective study over 12 months in patients with RA in LDA showed that self-reported flares were frequent, mostly short-lived, and triggered a variety of self-management strategies. MCP joints were most frequently affected by flares. Higher joint counts, CRP, and EGA were associated with greater odds of present flare, suggesting that patient-reported flares are a marker of increased inflammation. Patient-reported flares were mainly driven by pain and self-reported swollen joints, and were associated with treatment escalation.

In our study, 36% of patients reported present flare and 71% reported past flare at least once over 12 months. These findings are in accordance with the results of an observational study in patients with established RA, where the frequency of self-reported flares ranged from 54 to 74% over a 6-month period3. In an online survey among 403 patients with RA, 95% reported a transient flare at least once during the previous 12 months12. Despite different anchor questions to detect flares and various periods of recall, previous reports and our study lend support to the notion that self-reported flares are common in RA patients. The majority (55%) of present flares were reported to last less than 1 week, consistent with the findings in a recent report on flares in RA31.

We observed that the small joints of the hands were the primary target of flare, which has not been reported previously, to the best of our knowledge. A previous study showed that ultrasonography of the hands in patients with RA in clinical remission detected subclinical inflammation in > 90% of patients32, and we speculate that subclinical inflammation depicted by sensitive imaging modalities might be a trigger of short-lived transient flares, especially in the small joints of the hand. This hypothesis needs to be examined in future studies. We have recently observed that patients who self-reported hand flares had increased inflammatory activity on ultrasonography as compared to the status when not in flare33.

Previous reports about self-management strategies among flaring patients concur with our own observations: that the primary means of self-management among flaring patients have been analgesics and reducing activities, followed by avoiding activities and behavioral approaches27,28. The least common strategy has been the use of steroids and asking the rheumatology clinic for help, consistent with our results12,27. Rarely asking for external help during flaring was also observed in a recent study evaluating the effect of a nurse-led flare management intervention, wherein for the majority of flares (62%) patients preferred self-management rather than clinical visit (32% of flares) or nursing advice over the phone (6% of flares)34.

We found that all the traditional disease activity measures such as joint counts, CRP, or EGA were associated with present flare in the partly adjusted model. However, EGA, which is thought to depict clinical signs of inflammation, was the only independently associated item in the fully adjusted model35.

Among PRO, all RA-FQ flare domains and patient-reported joints were associated with present flare, while the association was strongest for pain. This was expected because pain was recognized as a critical feature in defining a flare already at OMERACT 9 in 2008, when the process to develop a flare definition was initiated13. Pain was also found to be a key determinant of flare in a study of patient perspective on flare9.

At OMERACT 9, the investigator breakout groups recognized that swollen and tender joint counts were essential features to be included in an overall flare definition, while the patients’ breakout group did not necessarily deem synovitis as relevant13. Similarly, in a study that aimed to develop a tool to identify RA flare, not all patients mentioned joint swelling as an item to consider when defining a flare19. We observed, however, that among patients reporting to be currently in flare, patient-reported swollen joints were more strongly associated with present flare status than patient-reported tender joints, and in the fully adjusted model, patient-reported swollen joints remained independently associated with flare, while patient-reported tender joints did not. In a recent study, patients with predominantly tender joints had lower levels of inflammation as defined by ultrasonography than patients with predominantly swollen joints36. Our finding, that patients weighted swollen joints higher than tender joints while reporting a flare, adds to the evidence that patient-reported flares may indeed reflect a higher burden of inflammation.

It has previously been speculated that comorbid conditions may influence patients’ self-report of flare37. Depression may interfere with endogenous pain inhibition and enhance pain sensitivity, which is known to have a longterm effect on pain-related outcomes38. In OA, peripheral joint damage is thought to be one of the most important causes of pain39. Remarkably, in our sample self-reported flare was not associated with comorbid conditions.

We observed that patient-reported flare was associated with escalation of medical treatment. This is in line with the OMERACT flare definition, which aims at identifying clinically relevant, inflammatory flares13,16. Previously, the rheumatologist’s intention to change/intensify a treatment has been used as a proxy for RA flare22,40.

The FLARA study was neither intended nor designed to validate the existing flare questionnaires, but to investigate which patient-reported and disease activity measures were associated with self-reported status of being in flare. We examined associations between RA-FQ flare domains because this questionnaire aims to detect present flares, and we recognize the relevance of the items from the FLARE-RA, which seeks to record exacerbation that occurred between 2 visits to a rheumatology clinic and queries 12 flare domains within the preceding 3-month period. Potential associations between the FLARE-RA domains and recent or current flares were beyond the scope of our present study.

Our study has several strengths, including prospective data collection and very low attrition rate, resulting in minimal missing data. A methodological strength is that we used mixed-effects logistic regression analyses, which is appropriate for repeated measurements, because it accounts for within-subject correlations, because we were dealing with repeated observations in the same individuals. We did not calculate lags because the timepoints for serial assessment were specified a priori. However, we included the time-varying aspect in all the models.

Limitations include the single-center design, and the sample selection restricted to patients with RA who were anti-CCP–and/or RF-positive, conditions thought to herald a worse prognosis41 but that may compromise the generalizability of our findings. However, flare characteristics in our sample are comparable to previous reports, including multicenter studies recruiting the broad range of patients with RA. We used an anchor question to identify a flare and left this decision to the patient’s discretion. For analysis of our study, no validated threshold of the sum score to detect a flare was available for the RA-FQ. Only very recently, candidate thresholds were proposed for the RA-FLARE42. The aim of the analysis of the PRO was to elucidate which of the individual flare domains were the most important drivers to the notion of the patients that they were experiencing a flare. We did not use a clinician flare definition as a standard to patient-reported flare, leaving our results susceptible to single-source bias. However, self-reported flare was also associated with clinical disease activity measures.

In this 1-year followup study of patients with RA in LDA or remission, flares were frequent, triggered a broad range of self-management strategies, and were substantiated by increased disease activity measures. Patients weighted the effect of swollen joints higher than that of tender joints at the time of flare, and self-reported flare was related to escalation of medical treatment. Our findings add support to the notion that patient-reported flares may reflect the inflammatory burden of RA, and can guide treatment modification in practice.

Acknowledgment

We thank all patients who participated in this study, along with the patient research partner. We thank research secretary Kirsten Frøhlich and research radiographer Henning Jakobsen, and the Danish Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases for logistical support. We also thank the staff of the hospital for assistance with recruitment of participants.

APPENDIX 1. Changes from baseline in clinical and patient-reported outcomes by flare status.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup

Footnotes

  • This study was supported by the Danish Rheumatism Association, the University of Southern Denmark, the Region of Southern Denmark, and the Knud og Edith Eriksens Mindefond (Knud and Edith Eriksens Memorial Fund).

  • Accepted for publication November 8, 2019.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Smolen JS,
    2. Landewe R,
    3. Bijlsma J,
    4. Burmester G,
    5. Chatzidionysiou K,
    6. Dougados M,
    7. et al.
    EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2016 update. Ann Rheum Dis 2017;76:960–77.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Stoffer MA,
    2. Schoels MM,
    3. Smolen JS,
    4. Aletaha D,
    5. Breedveld FC,
    6. Burmester G,
    7. et al.
    Evidence for treating rheumatoid arthritis to target: results of a systematic literature search update. Ann Rheum Dis 2016;75:16–22.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    1. Bykerk VP,
    2. Shadick N,
    3. Frits M,
    4. Bingham CO 3rd,
    5. Jeffery I,
    6. Iannaccone C,
    7. et al.
    Flares in rheumatoid arthritis: frequency and management. A report from the BRASS registry. J Rheumatol 2014;41:227–34.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    1. Kuettel D,
    2. Primdahl J,
    3. Christensen R,
    4. Ornbjerg LM,
    5. Horslev-Petersen K
    . Impact of patient-reported flares on radiographic progression and functional impairment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a cohort study based on the AMBRA trial. Scand J Rheumatol 2018;47:87–94.
    OpenUrl
  5. 5.↵
    1. Molenaar ET,
    2. Voskuyl AE,
    3. Dinant HJ,
    4. Bezemer PD,
    5. Boers M,
    6. Dijkmans BA
    . Progression of radiologic damage in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in clinical remission. Arthritis Rheum 2004;50:36–42.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Myasoedova E,
    2. Chandran A,
    3. Ilhan B,
    4. Major BT,
    5. Michet CJ,
    6. Matteson EL,
    7. et al.
    The role of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) flare and cumulative burden of RA severity in the risk of cardiovascular disease. Ann Rheum Dis 2016;75:560–5.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Bechman K,
    2. Tweehuysen L,
    3. Garrood T,
    4. Scott DL,
    5. Cope AP,
    6. Galloway JB,
    7. et al.
    Flares in rheumatoid arthritis patients with low disease activity: predictability and association with worse clinical outcomes. J Rheumatol 2018;45:1515–21.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. Markusse IM,
    2. Dirven L,
    3. Gerards AH,
    4. van Groenendael JH,
    5. Ronday HK,
    6. Kerstens PJ,
    7. et al.
    Disease flares in rheumatoid arthritis are associated with joint damage progression and disability: 10-year results from the BeSt study. Arthritis Res Ther 2015;17:232.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Hewlett S,
    2. Sanderson T,
    3. May J,
    4. Alten R,
    5. Bingham CO 3rd,
    6. Cross M,
    7. et al.
    ‘I’m hurting, I want to kill myself’: rheumatoid arthritis flare is more than a high joint count--an international patient perspective on flare where medical help is sought. Rheumatology 2012;51:69–76.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Flurey CA,
    2. Morris M,
    3. Richards P,
    4. Hughes R,
    5. Hewlett S
    . It’s like a juggling act: rheumatoid arthritis patient perspectives on daily life and flare while on current treatment regimes. Rheumatology 2014;53:696–703.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Kirwan JR,
    2. Hewlett SE,
    3. Heiberg T,
    4. Hughes RA,
    5. Carr M,
    6. Hehir M,
    7. et al.
    Incorporating the patient perspective into outcome assessment in rheumatoid arthritis-progress at OMERACT 7. J Rheumatol 2005;32:2250–6.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    1. Berthelot JM,
    2. Preiss P,
    3. Langiller M,
    4. Guillemin F,
    5. Fautrel B
    . Frequency, severity, and duration of transient flares in rheumatoid arthritis: A survey of 403 patients [abstract]. Ann Rheum Dis 2014;73:274–5.
    OpenUrl
  13. 13.↵
    1. Bingham CO 3rd,
    2. Pohl C,
    3. Woodworth TG,
    4. Hewlett SE,
    5. May JE,
    6. Rahman MU,
    7. et al.
    Developing a standardized definition for disease “flare” in rheumatoid arthritis (OMERACT 9 Special Interest Group). J Rheumatol 2009;36:2335–41.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. 14.↵
    1. Bykerk VP,
    2. Bingham CO,
    3. Choy EH,
    4. Lin D,
    5. Alten R,
    6. Christensen R,
    7. et al.
    Identifying flares in rheumatoid arthritis: reliability and construct validation of the OMERACT RA Flare Core Domain Set. RMD Open 2016;2:e000225.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. 15.↵
    1. Bykerk VP,
    2. Lie E,
    3. Bartlett SJ,
    4. Alten R,
    5. Boonen A,
    6. Christensen R,
    7. et al.
    Establishing a core domain set to measure rheumatoid arthritis flares: report of the OMERACT 11 RA flare Workshop. J Rheumatol 2014;41:799–809.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. 16.↵
    1. Alten R,
    2. Pohl C,
    3. Choy EH,
    4. Christensen R,
    5. Furst DE,
    6. Hewlett SE,
    7. et al.
    Developing a construct to evaluate flares in rheumatoid arthritis: a conceptual report of the OMERACT RA Flare Definition Working Group. J Rheumatol 2011;38:1745–50.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. 17.↵
    1. Bingham CO 3rd,
    2. Alten R,
    3. Bartlett SJ,
    4. Bykerk VP,
    5. Brooks PM,
    6. Choy E,
    7. et al;
    8. OMERACT RA Flare Definition Working Group
    . Identifying preliminary domains to detect and measure rheumatoid arthritis flares: report of the OMERACT 10 RA Flare Workshop. J Rheumatol 2011;38:1751–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. 18.↵
    1. Bartlett SJ,
    2. Bykerk VP,
    3. Cooksey R,
    4. Choy EH,
    5. Alten R,
    6. Christensen R,
    7. et al.
    Feasibility and domain validation of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) flare core domain set: report of the OMERACT 2014 RA Flare Group Plenary. J Rheumatol 2015;42:2185–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  19. 19.↵
    1. Berthelot JM,
    2. De Bandt M,
    3. Morel J,
    4. Benatig F,
    5. Constantin A,
    6. Gaudin P,
    7. et al;
    8. STPR group of French Society of Rheumatology
    . A tool to identify recent or present rheumatoid arthritis flare from both patient and physician perspectives: the ‘FLARE’ instrument. Ann Rheum Dis 2012;71:1110–6.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. 20.↵
    1. Bartlett SJ,
    2. Barbic SP,
    3. Bykerk VP,
    4. Choy EH,
    5. Alten R,
    6. Christensen R,
    7. et al.
    Content and construct validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the rheumatoid arthritis flare questionnaire: OMERACT 2016 Workshop report. J Rheumatol 2017;44:1536–43.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. 21.↵
    1. Fautrel B,
    2. Morel J,
    3. Berthelot JM,
    4. Constantin A,
    5. De Bandt M,
    6. Gaudin P,
    7. et al;
    8. STPR Group of the French Society of Rheumatology
    . Validation of FLARE-RA, a self-administered tool to detect recent or current rheumatoid arthritis flare. Arthritis Rheumatol 2017;69:309–19.
    OpenUrl
  22. 22.↵
    1. Saleem B,
    2. Brown AK,
    3. Quinn M,
    4. Karim Z,
    5. Hensor EM,
    6. Conaghan P,
    7. et al.
    Can flare be predicted in DMARD treated RA patients in remission, and is it important? A cohort study. Ann Rheum Dis 2012;71:1316–21.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  23. 23.↵
    1. Arnett FC,
    2. Edworthy SM,
    3. Bloch DA,
    4. McShane DJ,
    5. Fries JF,
    6. Cooper NS,
    7. et al.
    The American Rheumatism Association 1987 revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1988;31:315–24.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. 24.↵
    1. Aletaha D,
    2. Neogi T,
    3. Silman AJ,
    4. Funovits J,
    5. Felson DT,
    6. Bingham CO 3rd,
    7. et al.
    2010 Rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria: an American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative. Arthritis Rheum 2010;62:2569–81.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. de Thurah A,
    2. Maribo T,
    3. Stengaard-Pedersen K
    . Patient self-assessment of flare in rheumatoid arthritis: criterion and concurrent validity of the flare instrument. Clin Rheumatol 2016;35:467–71.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    1. Maribo T,
    2. de Thurah A,
    3. Stengaard-Pedersen K
    . Patient-self assessment of flare in rheumatoid arthritis: translation and reliability of the flare instrument. Clin Rheumatol 2016;35:1053–8.
    OpenUrl
  27. 27.↵
    1. Bartlett SJ,
    2. Bingham CO,
    3. Lin D,
    4. Boire G,
    5. Hitchon CA,
    6. Haraoui B,
    7. et al.
    How patients self-manage rheumatoid arthritis flares: findings from CATCH [abstract]. Ann Rheum Dis 2015;74:792–3.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  28. 28.↵
    1. Bartlett S,
    2. Bingham CO III,
    3. Lin D,
    4. Andersen K,
    5. Boire G,
    6. Hitchon C,
    7. et al.
    Working harder to stay in control: patient reports of flare in early RA are associated with higher disease activity and more intensive self management [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol 2015;67 Suppl 10:2277.
    OpenUrl
  29. 29.↵
    1. Thorsen H,
    2. Hansen TM,
    3. McKenna SP,
    4. Sorensen SF,
    5. Whalley D
    . Adaptation into Danish of the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and the Rheumatoid Arthritis Quality of Life Scale (RAQoL). Scand J Rheumatol 2001;30:103–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. 30.↵
    1. Radner H,
    2. Chatzidionysiou K,
    3. Nikiphorou E,
    4. Gossec L,
    5. Hyrich KL,
    6. Zabalan C,
    7. et al.
    2017 EULAR recommendations for a core data set to support observational research and clinical care in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2018;77:476–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  31. 31.↵
    1. Mahmoud TG,
    2. Huang J,
    3. Frits M,
    4. Iannaccone C,
    5. Bykerk V,
    6. Bingham CO 3rd,
    7. et al.
    Correlates of successful rheumatoid arthritis flare management: clinician-driven treatment, home-based strategies, and medication change. J Rheumatol 2020;47:333–40.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  32. 32.↵
    1. Hammer HB,
    2. Kvien TK,
    3. Terslev L
    . Ultrasound of the hand is sufficient to detect subclinical inflammation in rheumatoid arthritis remission: a post hoc longitudinal study. Arthritis Res Ther 2017;19:221.
    OpenUrl
  33. 33.↵
    1. Kuettel D,
    2. Terslev L,
    3. Weber U,
    4. Østergaard M,
    5. Primdahl J,
    6. Petersen R,
    7. et al.
    Flares in rheumatoid arthritis: do patient-reported swollen and tender joints match clinical and ultrasonography findings? Rheumatology 2020;59:129–36.
    OpenUrl
  34. 34.↵
    1. Myasoedova E,
    2. Crowson CS,
    3. Giblon R,
    4. Schaffer D,
    5. Wright K,
    6. Matteson EL,
    7. et al.
    Optimization of flare management in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: results of a randomised controlled trial [abstract]. Ann Rheum Dis 2019;78:A236.
    OpenUrl
  35. 35.↵
    1. Desthieux C,
    2. Hermet A,
    3. Granger B,
    4. Fautrel B,
    5. Gossec L
    . Patient-physician discordance in global assessment in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review with meta-analysis. Arthritis Care Res 2016;68:1767–73.
    OpenUrl
  36. 36.↵
    1. Hammer HB,
    2. Michelsen B,
    3. Provan SA,
    4. Sexton J,
    5. Lampa J,
    6. Uhlig T,
    7. et al.
    Tender joint count may not reflect inflammatory activity in established rheumatoid arthritis patients - results from a longitudinal study. Arthritis Care Res 2020;72:27–35.
    OpenUrl
  37. 37.↵
    1. Filippou G,
    2. Sakellariou G,
    3. Scire CA,
    4. Carrara G,
    5. Rumi F,
    6. Bellis E,
    7. et al.
    The predictive role of ultrasound-detected tenosynovitis and joint synovitis for flare in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in stable remission. Results of an Italian multicentre study of the Italian Society for Rheumatology Group for Ultrasound: the STARTER study. Ann Rheum Dis 2018;77:1283–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  38. 38.↵
    1. Edwards RR,
    2. Cahalan C,
    3. Mensing G,
    4. Smith M,
    5. Haythornthwaite JA
    . Pain, catastrophizing, and depression in the rheumatic diseases. Nat Rev Rheumatol 2011;7:216–24.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. 39.↵
    1. Gwilym SE,
    2. Pollard TC,
    3. Carr AJ
    . Understanding pain in osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008;90:280–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. 40.↵
    1. van der Maas A,
    2. den Broeder AA
    . Measuring flares in rheumatoid arthritis. (Why) do we need validated criteria? J Rheumatol 2014;41:189–91.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  41. 41.↵
    1. Hecht C,
    2. Englbrecht M,
    3. Rech J,
    4. Schmidt S,
    5. Araujo E,
    6. Engelke K,
    7. et al.
    Additive effect of anti-citrullinated protein antibodies and rheumatoid factor on bone erosions in patients with RA. Ann Rheum Dis 2015;74:2151–6.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  42. 42.↵
    1. Myasoedova E,
    2. De Thurah A,
    3. Erpelding ML,
    4. Schneeberger EE,
    5. Maribo T,
    6. Citera G,
    7. et al.
    Definition and construct validation of clinically relevant cutoffs on the Flare Assessment in Rheumatoid Arthritis (FLARE-RA) questionnaire. Semin Arthritis Rheum 2020;50:261–5.
    OpenUrl
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Rheumatology
Vol. 47, Issue 9
1 Sep 2020
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by Author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about The Journal of Rheumatology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Pain and Self-reported Swollen Joints Are Main Drivers of Patient-reported Flares in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results from a 12-month Observational Study
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from The Journal of Rheumatology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the The Journal of Rheumatology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Pain and Self-reported Swollen Joints Are Main Drivers of Patient-reported Flares in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results from a 12-month Observational Study
Dorota Kuettel, Jette Primdahl, Ulrich Weber, Lene Terslev, Mikkel Østergaard, Randi Petersen, Andreas Kristian Pedersen, Sören Möller, Kim Hørslev-Petersen
The Journal of Rheumatology Sep 2020, 47 (9) 1305-1313; DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.190760

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

 Request Permissions

Share
Pain and Self-reported Swollen Joints Are Main Drivers of Patient-reported Flares in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results from a 12-month Observational Study
Dorota Kuettel, Jette Primdahl, Ulrich Weber, Lene Terslev, Mikkel Østergaard, Randi Petersen, Andreas Kristian Pedersen, Sören Möller, Kim Hørslev-Petersen
The Journal of Rheumatology Sep 2020, 47 (9) 1305-1313; DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.190760
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Acknowledgment
    • APPENDIX 1. Changes from baseline in clinical and patient-reported outcomes by flare status.
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
  • eLetters

Keywords

RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS
PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES
FLARES

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Physician- and Patient-reported Effectiveness Are Similar for Tofacitinib and TNFi in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Data From a Rheumatoid Arthritis Registry
  • Association of Sinusitis and Upper Respiratory Tract Diseases With Incident Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Case-control Study
  • Exploring Family Planning, Parenting, and Sexual and Reproductive Health Care Experiences of Men With Rheumatic Diseases
Show more Rheumatoid Arthritis

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • rheumatoid arthritis
  • patient-reported outcomes
  • FLARES

Content

  • First Release
  • Current
  • Archives
  • Collections
  • Audiovisual Rheum
  • COVID-19 and Rheumatology

Resources

  • Guide for Authors
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Author Payment
  • Reviewers
  • Advertisers
  • Classified Ads
  • Reprints and Translations
  • Permissions
  • Meetings
  • FAQ
  • Policies

Subscribers

  • Subscription Information
  • Purchase Subscription
  • Your Account
  • Terms and Conditions

More

  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • My Alerts
  • My Folders
  • Privacy/GDPR Policy
  • RSS Feeds
The Journal of Rheumatology
The content of this site is intended for health care professionals.
Copyright © 2022 by The Journal of Rheumatology Publishing Co. Ltd.
Print ISSN: 0315-162X; Online ISSN: 1499-2752
Powered by HighWire