Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34761277›Full record

ArticleRheumatology international2022

Intra-articular therapies: patient preferences and professional practices in European countries.

Jenny de la Torre-Aboki, Jacqueline Uson, Irene Pitsillidou, Valentina Vardanyan, Elena Nikiphorou, Sebastian C Rodriguez-Garcia, Raul Castellanos-Moreira, Hemant Pandit, Terence W O'Neill, Michael Doherty and 8 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Rheumatology international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. EULAR recommendations for intra-articular therapies.Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2021
    Guideline
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Observational
  12. 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

18 authors.

Jenny de la Torre-AbokiHospital de día and Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de Alicante (ISABIAL), Hospital General Universitario, Alicante, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-4905-2034
Jacqueline UsonDepartment of Rheumatology, Hospital Universitario de Móstoles, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-2933-4878
Irene PitsillidouEULAR Patient Research Partner, Executive Secretary of Cyprus League Against Rheumatism, Nicosia, Cyprus.
Valentina VardanyanYerevan State Medical University, Mikayelyan University Hospital, Yerevan, Armenia.ORCID 0000-0002-8582-7837
Elena NikiphorouCentre for Rheumatic Diseases, Department of Inflammation Biology, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, Rheumatology Department, King's College Hospital, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6847-3726
Sebastian C Rodriguez-GarciaRheumatology Department, La Princesa University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-7773-151X
Raul Castellanos-MoreiraHospital Clínic I Provincial, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-4104-4101
Hemant PanditUniversity of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7392-8561
Terence W O'NeillCentre for Epidemiology Versus Arthritis, University of Manchester & NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8896-4677
Michael DohertyUniversity of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5763-8326
Mikael BoesenDepartment of Radiology, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg-Frederiksberg, Frederiksberg, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-8774-6563
Ingrid MöllerInstituto Poal de Reumatología. Universidad de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-9225-2568
Lene TerslevCenter for Rheumatology and Spine Diseases, Rigshospitalet, Glostrup, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-8193-9471
Maria Antonietta D'AgostinoCatholic University of Sacred Heart-Policlinico Universitario A Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5347-0060
Willm Uwe KampenNuklearmedizin Spitalerhof, Radiologische Allianz, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3500-9713
Francis BerenbaumDepartment of Rheumatology, Sorbonne University, INSERM CRSA, AP-HP Saint-Antoine Hospital, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0001-8252-7815
Esperanza NaredoDepartment of Rheumatology, Joint and Bone Research Unit. Hospital, Universitario Fundación Jiménez Díaz, IIS Fundación Jiménez Díaz and Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-0017-0096
Loreto CarmonaInstituto de Salud Musculoesquelética, InMusc, Calle Ofelia Nieto, 10, 28039, Madrid, Spain. loreto.carmona@inmusc.eu.ORCID 0000-0002-4401-2551

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To assess patient perspective and professional practice of intraarticular therapies (IATs) across Europe, an expert international multidisciplinary panel designed two open web-based surveys: one targeting people who had experienced at least two IATs (44 items); and one targeting health care providers (HCPs) (160 items). Surveys were disseminated via patient and professional associations and social media. A descriptive analysis was performed. The surveys were answered by 200 patients and 186 HCPs from 26 countries, showing that IAT is routinely performed by rheumatologists (97%) and orthopaedic surgeons (89%), with specific training being compulsory in a few countries. The most frequent indications for IAT are arthritis (76%), osteoarthritis (74%), crystal arthritis (71%) and bursitis (70%); the most frequently injected joints are knee (78%) and shoulder (70%); and the most used compounds are glucocorticoids. The majority of HCPs report informing patients about side-effects (73%), benefits (72%), and the nature of the procedure (72%), which coincides with 27% of patients reporting that they had not been informed about benefits or potential complications of IATs; 73% of patients had not been asked whether they wanted an anaesthetic. Few HCPs (10%) obtain written consent (56% get oral consent, being mandatory for 32%), a procedure deemed necessary by 41% of the patients. 50% of patients reported a clear benefit of IAT and 20% experienced complications including pain, impaired mobility, rashes, or swelling. In summary, the practice of IAT is variable across Europe, and although patients perceive it as relatively safe and usually effective procedure, some gaps were identified.

Indexed as

OsteoarthritisPatient PreferenceEuropeHumansProfessional PracticeSurveys and QuestionnairesClinical practiceGlucocorticoidsInfiltrationsIntraarticular therapiesPatient’s experienceSurveys

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.