@article {Curtis40, author = {Jeffrey R. Curtis and Lang Chen and Maria I. Danila and Kenneth G. Saag and Kathy L. Parham and John J. Cush}, title = {Routine Use of Quantitative Disease Activity Measurements among US Rheumatologists: Implications for Treat-to-target Management Strategies in Rheumatoid Arthritis}, volume = {45}, number = {1}, pages = {40--44}, year = {2018}, doi = {10.3899/jrheum.170548}, publisher = {The Journal of Rheumatology}, abstract = {Objective. The aim of our study was to examine why real-world practices and attitudes regarding quantitative measurements of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have received limited attention.Methods. An e-mail survey asked US rheumatologists to self-report on their use of quantitative measurements (metric).Results. Among 439 respondents, metric rheumatologists (58\%) were more likely to be in group practice and to use tumor necrosis factor inhibitors. The quantitative tools most commonly used were the Health Assessment Questionnaire (35.5\%) and the Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (27.1\%). Reasons for not measuring included time needed and electronic availability. Based on simulated case scenarios, providing more quantitative information increased the likelihood that a patient would change to a different disease-modifying antirheumatic drug or biologic.Conclusion. Routine use of quantitative measurement for patients in the United States with RA is increasing over time but remains low.}, issn = {0315-162X}, URL = {https://www.jrheum.org/content/45/1/40}, eprint = {https://www.jrheum.org/content/45/1/40.full.pdf}, journal = {The Journal of Rheumatology} }