Back to Search Start Over

ASAS modification of the Berlin algorithm for diagnosing axial spondyloarthritis: results from the SPondyloArthritis Caught Early (SPACE)-cohort and from the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS)-cohort.

Authors :
van den Berg, Rosaline
de Hooge, Manouk
Rudwaleit, Martin
Sieper, Joachim
van Gaalen, Floris
Reijnierse, Monique
Landewé, Robert
Huizinga, Tom
van der Heijde, Désirée
Source :
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases; Oct2013, Vol. 72 Issue 10, p1646-1653, 8p, 2 Diagrams, 4 Charts
Publication Year :
2013

Abstract

Objective To compare the original Berlin algorithm for diagnosing axial Spondyloarthritis (axSpA) with two modifications in the SPondyloArthritis Caught Early (SPACE)-cohort and the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) axSpA criteria validation (ASAS)-cohort. Methods Patients in the SPACE-cohort (back pain ≥3 months, ≤2 years, onset <45 years) and the ASAS-cohort (undiagnosed chronic back pain) were diagnosed according to three algorithms: original (inflammatory back pain (IBP) mandatory), modification 1 (IBP defined by ≥3/5 IBP-features instead of ≥4/5) and modification 2 (IBP deleted as obligatory entry criterion, added as SpA-feature). Diagnosis by rheumatologist, ASAS axSpA criteria and likelihood ratio product were used as external standards to test the performance of the algorithms. Results SPACE-cohort: Compared to the diagnosis by rheumatologist (either axSpA or no-axSpA), the original algorithm agreed in 120 patients (76.4%). Agreement decreased using modification 1 (119 patients; 75.8%), increased using modification 2 (125 patients; 79.6%). Sensitivity increased from 66.2% (original) to 72.3% (modification 1) and 78.5% (modification 2). Specificity decreased more using modification 1 (83.7% to 78.3%) than when using modification 2 (83.7% to 79.6%). ASAS-cohort: Compared to the diagnosis by rheumatologist (either axSpA or no-axSpA), the original algorithm agreed in 484 patients (70.7%). Agreement increased using modification 1 (520 patients; 75.9%) and modification 2 (548 patients; 80.0%). Sensitivity increased from 65.3% (original) to 77.9% (modification 1) and 79.6% (modification 2). Specificity decreased more using modification 1 (79.2% to 72.2%) than when using modification 2 (79.2% to 75.6%). Conclusions ASAS accepted a modified algorithm for diagnosing axSpA in which IBP is excluded as obligatory entry criterion and added as SpA-feature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
00034967
Volume :
72
Issue :
10
Database :
Complementary Index
Journal :
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
90143142
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2012-201884