Search

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic imposed enormous challenges for healthcare professionals. Nursing staff had to work under psychological pressure to maintain patient safety. Resilience has proven to be a protective psychological health factor that can safeguard healthcare professionals' mental health and wellbeing during healthcare crises. The state of resilience among Dutch healthcare professionals is not yet known. Objective: This study investigated perceived resilience and perception of patient safety during the COVID-19 pandemic among Dutch nursing staff. Additionally, individual differences in resilience were examined in relation to patient safety. Method: An online survey about resilience and patient safety was sent to 2,611 members of the Dutch Nursing Staff Panel in June 2021, after the third wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Netherlands. Results: 884 certified nursing staff professionals completed the survey (33% response rate). Nursing staff considered themselves resilient with a positive perception of patient safety within their organization. Factors that influenced resilience were education, age, part-time employment, experiences with treating patients with a COVID-19 infection, and having suffered from a COVID-19 infection. Nursing staff who perceived higher resilience reported to act more flexible during their work, to encounter more unexpected situations and they found that working according protocols and guidelines had improved during the pandemic. Discussion: The results show a more positive pattern compared to other European countries. In the Netherlands, nursing staff considered themselves as highly resilient. Conclusions: Resilient healthcare professionals report to be better able to handle crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Optimally, strengthening individual resilience for the healthcare organization may secure the patient safety of health care in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Guidelines suggest treatment in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to target remission, in close consultation with the patient. Our recent qualitative study of the patients' perspective on remission in RA identified 26 domains. The current study aimed to identify a short list of the most important aspects to inform future research.Methods: Patients with RA from the Netherlands, the UK, Austria, Denmark, France and the USA completed a survey that contained all domains identified in our qualitative study. They rated domains for importance ('not important', 'important' or 'essential' to characterise a period of remission) and if important or essential, whether this domain needs to be 'less', 'almost gone' or 'gone' to reflect remission. Respondents were also asked to determine their personal top 3 most important/essential domains. Frequency of specific domains in the top 3 was calculated, and domains were sorted on the percentage of patients that evaluated a particular domain as 'essential'.Results: Of 274 respondents, 75% were female, mean (SD) age 57(13) years, disease duration 12(9) years. The top 3 were as follows: pain (67%), fatigue (33%) and independence (19%); domains most frequently rated as 'essential' were as follows: pain (60%), being mobile (52%), physical function (51%), being independent (47%) and fatigue (41%). Pain needed to be less (13%), almost gone (42%) or gone (45%) to reflect remission. Similar patterns were seen for fatigue, independence, mobility and physical functioning.Conclusion: Patients identified pain, fatigue and independence as the most important domains of RA disease activity that need to be improved to reflect remission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To determine to what extent baseline measurements of the ratio receptor activator of nuclear factor-κB ligand (RANKL):osteoprotegerin (OPG) and C-terminal cross linking of type-I and type-II (CTX-I and CTX-II), in addition to traditional markers of disease severity, could predict annual radiological progression. Methods A cohort of 155 patients with early, active, untreated rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who participated in the Combination Therapy in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis trial (COBRA trial) was followed up for 11 years. Urine was sampled at baseline and after 3 months from the start of treatment and analysed for CTX-I and CTX-II. Baseline serum samples were analysed for RANKL and OPG. Available traditional markers of disease severity included baseline measurements of erythrocyte sedimentation rate, rheumatoid factor and baseline radiological damage. A digital database of frequent radiographs was available, scored according to the Sharp/van der Heijde method. Individual annual progression rates were calculated and used as outcome variable. Multiple linear regression analyses identified the strongest predictors of annual radiological progression. Results In multivariable analyses the RANKL:OPG ratio and CTX-I or CTX-II proved to be independent predictors of annual radiological damage over 11 years. The prediction of annual radiological progression was strongest when the RANKL:OPG ratio and CTX-I or CTX-II were evaluated in the same model (36–39% explained variance). Adding the effect of treatment at 3 months to the baseline models improved the predictive ability of the models up to 44–46%. Conclusion Unfavourable baseline levels of the RANKL:OPG ratio as well as CTX-I and CTX-II in patients with early, active, untreated RA are strong independent predictors of rapid and persistent damage progression over the 11-year follow-up. Early improvement in bone markers by treatment predicts a better outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background COBRA (for ‘COmbinatie therapie Bij Rheumatoide Artritis’) combination therapy is effective for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but long-term safety is unknown. This study evaluates survival, comorbidities and joint damage in the original COBRA trial cohort. Methods In the COBRA trial, 155 patients with early RA were treated with sulfasalazine (SSZ) monotherapy (SSZ group) or a combination of step-down prednisolone, methotrexate (MTX) and SSZ (COBRA group). The current 11-year follow-up study of the COBRA trial invited all original patients and performed protocollised scrutiny of clinical records, questionnaires, physical examination, laboratory and imaging tests. Results In all, 152 out of 155 patients yielded at least partial data. After a mean of 11 years follow-up, 18 (12%) patients had died, 6 COBRA patients and 12 SSZ patients, HR 0.57 (95% CI 0.21 to 1.52). Treatment for hypertension was significantly more prevalent in the COBRA group (p=0.02) with similar trends for diabetes and cataract. Conversely, hypercholesterolaemia, cancer and infection showed a trend in favour of COBRA. Other comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease and fractures appeared in similar frequency. Radiographic findings suggest as a minimum sustained benefit for COBRA therapy, that is, difference in joint damage but similar subsequent progression rates after 5 years. Imputation to compensate for selective dropout suggests increasing benefit for COBRA, that is, difference in yearly progression rates similar to that seen in the first 5 years of follow-up. Conclusions After 11 years, initial COBRA combination therapy resulted in numerically lower mortality and similar prevalence of comorbidity compared with initial SSZ monotherapy. In addition, lower progression of joint damage suggests long-term disease modification. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The first definition of remission in rheumatoid arthritis was proposed by Pinals and colleagues in 1981. Although its development process was of high quality, the definition proved unfeasible and was not often applied. Subsequently many other definitions appeared, either as variations or as cutpoints of disease activity indices. The American College of Rheumatology, together with the European League Against Rheumatism and the Initiative for Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) decided to develop a new definition that would meet the OMERACT Filter of Truth, discrimination and Feasibility. This article summarizes the development process to date. The new definition is expected to be launches in 2010. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate whether remission at single and consecutive visits predicts good outcome in early rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Methods: The presence of remission according to American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) and other criteria (Boolean clinical, Clinical Disease Activity Index, Disease Activity Score [DAS], DAS in 28 joints, and Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3) was assessed in early RA patients during the first year of the Combination Therapy for Rheumatoid Arthritis light trial. Likelihood ratios were used to assess whether meeting the remission criteria at single visits (13, 26, 39, or 52 weeks) and consecutive visits (13 and 26, 26 and 39, or 39 and 52 weeks) predicted good outcome in the second year (52-104 weeks). Good outcome was defined for function (Health Assessment Questionnaire score consistently ≤0.5 and no deterioration), radiographic damage progression (no deterioration in Sharp/van der Heijde scores), and both ("overall good outcome").Results: Of the original 164 trial patients, 144 had evaluable data. In the second year, good functional outcome was observed in 35%, good radiographic outcome in 79%, and both in 28% of the patients. Almost all criteria predicted good functional and good overall outcome, at both single and consecutive visits; only single DAS remission did not significantly predict good overall outcome (P = 0.07). Sustained remission periods resulted in higher likelihood ratios than remission at single visits. None of the criteria predicted good radiographic outcome.Conclusion: Early RA patients who reached remission according to ACR/EULAR and other criteria during short or sustained periods were likely to retain good physical function in the subsequent months. Sustained remission periods were a stronger predictor than remission at single visits. However, in the setting of low overall damage progression, (sustained) remission was not predictive of good radiographic outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recent qualitative research has shown that stiffness is an important symptom for patients to identify remission. However, it is unclear how to measure stiffness in low disease activity. This systematic review aims to summarise the existing literature on validity of patient reported outcomes to measure stiffness in RA low disease activity states, to aid the choice for a measurement instrument.Methods: An extensive pubmed-search was undertaken, identifying measurement instruments for patient perceived stiffness used in low disease activity. Eligible studies reported on 1) stiffness as an outcome in relation to other core set measures, 2) development of a patient reported tool to measure stiffness, or 3) comparison of two different tools to measure aspects of stiffness, all in low disease activity.Results: Of 788 titles, only two studies report on validity of stiffness measures within low disease activity. Morning stiffness (MS) is reported in 44 to 80% of patients in low disease activity. A difference of 40 to 60 minutes in duration until maximum improvement is observed between active and inactive patients. Severity of MS might discriminate better between high and low disease activity compared to measurement of duration of MS.Conclusions: There is insufficient data on measurement of stiffness in the spectrum of low disease activity or remission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Medication prescribing by pharmacists is a task shifting approach to help ensure quality and accessibility of healthcare. In many countries, like the Netherlands, pharmacist prescribing is not legally ensured, and it is unknown what citizens think of its potential introduction., Objective: To investigate citizen perspectives on the potential role of pharmacists in prescribing in primary care., Methods: A Citizen Platform with citizens (>18 years) from the Netherlands was conducted in October 2022. This consisted of a one-day program in which the participants were engaged in interactive assignments and received expert presentations to foster the development of informed opinions. In the final assignment, 3 participant groups designed their ideal future scenario including preconditions regarding the role of the pharmacist in prescribing in primary care. All assignments were recorded, and notes were taken. The researchers then consolidated the 3 scenarios into one version and categorized the preconditions. The Citizen Platform results were summarized and subsequently discussed in 2 online focus groups with other citizens in February 2023 to investigate the perspectives of less informed citizens. Focus group discussions were audio-recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed., Results: The Citizen Platform ( n  = 10) resulted in a shared scenario involving a primary care center where general practitioners (GPs) pharmacists and other healthcare professionals collaborate as a team. In this scenario, pharmacists can modify treatment in certain chronic diseases, manage minor ailments and support GPs with the care for patients with complex needs. Preconditions needed to realize this scenario include having shared medical records, the GP retaining the overview of the care for the patient and additional training for pharmacists. The focus groups ( n  = 6, in total) yielded 5 themes which acknowledge potential pharmacist prescribing but depict a more skeptical view towards pharmacist prescribing and include several concerns, for example pharmacists' potential conflict of interest., Conclusions: Citizens that are informed about opportunities for pharmacy prescribing are capable of sketching potential scenarios for pharmacist prescribing in a collaborative primary care context. Less informed citizens seem more skeptical towards pharmacist prescribing., Competing Interests: Funding: This research was funded by BENU Nederland BV and Service Apotheek Beheer BV. Both organizations provided advice related to study design and interpretation of the data. BENU Nederland BV and Service Apotheek Beheer BV neither had a decisive role in study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; nor in the submission of this article for publication. TK received postdoctoral research funding from the Elisabeth and Alfred Ahlqvist foundation (Sweden). The foundation had no involvement in the study. The authors have no other potential competing interests to declare., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of treat-to-target combination therapy with intensification at 13 weeks in early RA., Methods: Early RA patients were classified as being at high or low risk of worsening RA based on disease activity and prognostic factors. High-risk patients received COBRA-light (prednisolone 30 mg/day tapered to 7.5 mg/day, MTX increasing to 25 mg/week), and low-risk patients received MTX monotherapy increasing to 25 mg/week. The primary outcome (target) was DAS44 < 1.6 or EULAR good response at 26 weeks. At 13 weeks, non-responders were randomized to (open-label) intensification [high-risk patients: prednisolone 60 mg/day tapered to 7.5 mg/day, addition of SSZ (2 g/day) and HCQ (400 mg/day); low-risk patients: prednisolone 30 mg/day tapered to 7.5 mg/day] or continuation., Results: In the high-risk group (n = 150), 110 patients (73%) reached the target at 13 weeks, and 9 dropped out. Non-responders were randomized to intensification (n = 15) or continuation (n = 16), and after 26 weeks, 12 (80%) vs 7 (44%) of these, respectively, reached the target [difference: 36%, (95% CI 2%, 71%); P = 0.04]. In the low-risk group (n = 40), 17 (43%) reached the target. Non-responders were randomized to intensification (n = 8) or continuation (n = 7); 4 vs 3, respectively, reached the target.Adverse event rates were higher in the high-risk group, and higher in the intensification subgroup of that group. Serious adverse events were rare. Protocol violations were frequent and mostly led to mitigation of actual treatment intensification., Conclusion: Initial combination therapy was very successful in high-risk RA, and early intensification was beneficial in patients not reaching the strict target. The low-risk group was too small for drawing conclusions. In routine practice, adherence to early intensification based on strict targets is difficult., Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register (NTR), NL4393, https://www.trialregister.nl/., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.)

This study is conducted in order to gain a better understanding of the relationship between physical activity and agitated behavior among older people with dementia, and physical activity and characteristics of long-term care wards. Data were collected among people with dementia living in long-term care facilities (N = 76) by conducting observations at the wards and distributing questionnaires among professional caregivers. The results show that participants are largely inactive (82.8%) and a significant relation was found between the degree of physical activity and characteristics of the ward such as "taking sufficient time," which relates to the time caregivers take when interacting with residents. This study supports the existing knowledge about the degree of physical activity among people with dementia in long-term care and adds information about the potential influence of organizational factors that could be valuable for daily practice.