RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Ultrasound as an Outcome Measure in Gout. A Validation Process by the OMERACT Ultrasound Working Group
JF The Journal of Rheumatology
JO J Rheumatol
FD The Journal of Rheumatology
SP 2177
OP 2181
DO 10.3899/jrheum.141294
VO 42
IS 11
A1 Lene Terslev
A1 Marwin Gutierrez
A1 Wolfgang A. Schmidt
A1 Helen I. Keen
A1 Emilio Filippucci
A1 David Kane
A1 Ralf Thiele
A1 Gurjit Kaeley
A1 Peter Balint
A1 Peter Mandl
A1 Andrea Delle Sedie
A1 Hilde Berner Hammer
A1 Robin Christensen
A1 Ingrid Möller
A1 Carlos Pineda
A1 Eugene Kissin
A1 George A. Bruyn
A1 Annamaria Iagnocco
A1 Esperanza Naredo
A1 Maria Antonietta D’Agostino
YR 2015
UL http://www.jrheum.org/content/42/11/2177.abstract
AB Objective. To summarize the work performed by the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Ultrasound (US) Working Group on the validation of US as a potential outcome measure in gout.Methods. Based on the lack of definitions, highlighted in a recent literature review on US as an outcome tool in gout, a series of iterative exercises were carried out to obtain consensus-based definitions on US elementary components in gout using a Delphi exercise and subsequently testing these definitions in static images and in patients with proven gout. Cohen’s κ was used to test agreement, and values of 0–0.20 were considered poor, 0.20–0.40 fair, 0.40–0.60 moderate, 0.60–0.80 good, and 0.80–1 excellent.Results. With an agreement of > 80%, consensus-based definitions were obtained for the 4 elementary lesions highlighted in the literature review: tophi, aggregates, erosions, and double contour (DC). In static images interobserver reliability ranged from moderate to almost perfect, and similar results were found for the intrareader reliability. In patients the intraobserver agreement was good for all lesions except DC (moderate). The interobserver agreement was poor for aggregates and DC but moderate for the other components.Conclusion. These first steps in evaluating the validity of US as an outcome measure for gout show that the reliability of the definitions ranged from moderate to excellent in static images and somewhat lower in patients, indicating that a standardized scanning technique may be needed, before testing the responsiveness of those definitions in a composite US score.