Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31219668›Full record

Trial reportMusculoskeletal care2019

A randomized study comparing regular care with a nurse-led clinic based on tight disease activity control and person-centred care in patients with rheumatoid arthritis with moderate/high disease activity: A 6-month evaluation.

Ulrika Bergsten, Katarina Almehed, Amir Baigi, Lennart T H Jacobsson

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Musculoskeletal care, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ulrika BergstenResearch and Development Department at Region of Halland, Halmstad, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-5026-7342
Katarina AlmehedRheumatology Department, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Goteborg, Sweden.
Amir BaigiResearch and Development Department at Region of Halland, Halmstad, Sweden.
Lennart T H JacobssonDepartment of Rheumatology and Inflammation Research, University of Gothenburg, Goteborg, Sweden.
Hallands sjukhus Halmstad · SESahlgrenska University Hospital · SEUniversity of Gothenburg · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionA recent survey showed that 27% of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients had inadequately controlled disease activity. Hence, there is a need for new strategies aiming at improving patient outcomes. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of a nurse-led clinic with frequent visits, treat-to-target and person-centred care of patients with established RA and moderate-to-high disease activity compared with patients receiving regular care.

methodsThe study was a randomized, controlled trial over 26 weeks, with a nonrandomized extension to week 50. Patients were randomized to an intervention group (IG; nurse-led clinic) based on person-centred care, frequent visits and "treat to target", or to a control group (CG) which visited the clinic according to care as usual. The primary outcome was the difference in the DAS28 change between the IG and the CG groups.

resultsA total of 332 patients were screened for eligibility, of which 70 were randomly assigned to either the IG (n = 36) or the CG (n = 34) group. The primary outcome was not met, although patients in the IG group tended to improve more than those in the CG group (difference: 0.43 (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.27, 1.13). In both the IG and CG groups, delta-DAS28 improved significantly. The European League Against Rheumatology moderate or good response was achieved by 76% (95% CI 58, 89) in the IG and 49% (95% CI 32, 65) in the CG group.

conclusionsDisease activity tended to improve more with the nurse-led intervention compared with regular care, although the difference was not significant, probably partly due to the lack of statistical power.

Indexed as

Disease ManagementAdultAgedArthritis, RheumatoidFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPractice Patterns, Nurses'nursingrheumatoid arthritisself-management

Identifiers

PMID31219668
PMCPMC6852576
OpenAlexW2952168698

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.