P Richette1, P Clerson2, S Bouée3, G Chalès4, M Doherty5, R M Flipo6, C Lambert7, F Lioté1, T Poiraud8, T Schaeverbeke9, T Bardin10. 1. Université Paris Diderot, UFR médicale, Paris, France; Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Lariboisiére, Fédération de Rhumatologie, Paris, Cedex, France INSERM 1132, Université Paris-Diderot, Hôpital Lariboisière, Paris, France. 2. Orgamétrie Biostatistiques, Roubaix, France. 3. Cemka-Eval, Bourg La Reine, France. 4. Service de rhumatologie, Hôpital Sud, CHU Rennes, Université de Rennes-1, Rennes, Cedex, France. 5. Academic Rheumatology, University of Nottingham, City Hospital, Nottingham, UK. 6. Service de Rhumatologie, Université de Lille 2, Hôpital Roger-Salengro, CHRU de Lille. 7. Département médical, Ipsen, Boulogne, France. 8. Département médical, Ménarini, Rungis, France. 9. Département de Rhumatologie, Hôpital Pellegrin, CHU de Bordeaux, place Amélie-Raba-Léon, Bordeaux, France. 10. Université Paris Diderot, UFR médicale, Paris, France; Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Lariboisiére, Fédération de Rhumatologie, Paris, Cedex, France.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: In France, the prevalence of gout is currently unknown. We aimed to design a questionnaire to detect gout that would be suitable for use in a telephone survey by non-physicians and assessed its performance. METHODS: We designed a 62-item questionnaire covering comorbidities, clinical features and treatment of gout. In a case-control study, we enrolled patients with a history of arthritis who had undergone arthrocentesis for synovial fluid analysis and crystal detection. Cases were patients with crystal-proven gout and controls were patients who had arthritis and effusion with no monosodium urate crystals in synovial fluid. The questionnaire was administered by phone to cases and controls by non-physicians who were unaware of the patient diagnosis. Logistic regression analysis and classification and regression trees were used to select items discriminating cases and controls. RESULTS: We interviewed 246 patients (102 cases and 142 controls). Two logistic regression models (sensitivity 88.0% and 87.5%; specificity 93.0% and 89.8%, respectively) and one classification and regression tree model (sensitivity 81.4%, specificity 93.7%) revealed 11 informative items that allowed for classifying 90.0%, 88.8% and 88.5% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a questionnaire to detect gout containing 11 items that is fast and suitable for use in a telephone survey by non-physicians. The questionnaire demonstrated good properties for discriminating patients with and without gout. It will be administered in a large sample of the general population to estimate the prevalence of gout in France. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
OBJECTIVES: In France, the prevalence of gout is currently unknown. We aimed to design a questionnaire to detect gout that would be suitable for use in a telephone survey by non-physicians and assessed its performance. METHODS: We designed a 62-item questionnaire covering comorbidities, clinical features and treatment of gout. In a case-control study, we enrolled patients with a history of arthritis who had undergone arthrocentesis for synovial fluid analysis and crystal detection. Cases were patients with crystal-proven gout and controls were patients who had arthritis and effusion with no monosodium urate crystals in synovial fluid. The questionnaire was administered by phone to cases and controls by non-physicians who were unaware of the patient diagnosis. Logistic regression analysis and classification and regression trees were used to select items discriminating cases and controls. RESULTS: We interviewed 246 patients (102 cases and 142 controls). Two logistic regression models (sensitivity 88.0% and 87.5%; specificity 93.0% and 89.8%, respectively) and one classification and regression tree model (sensitivity 81.4%, specificity 93.7%) revealed 11 informative items that allowed for classifying 90.0%, 88.8% and 88.5% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a questionnaire to detect gout containing 11 items that is fast and suitable for use in a telephone survey by non-physicians. The questionnaire demonstrated good properties for discriminating patients with and without gout. It will be administered in a large sample of the general population to estimate the prevalence of gout in France. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
Authors: Tuhina Neogi; Tim L Th A Jansen; Nicola Dalbeth; Jaap Fransen; H Ralph Schumacher; Dianne Berendsen; Melanie Brown; Hyon Choi; N Lawrence Edwards; Hein J E M Janssens; Frédéric Lioté; Raymond P Naden; George Nuki; Alexis Ogdie; Fernando Perez-Ruiz; Kenneth Saag; Jasvinder A Singh; John S Sundy; Anne-Kathrin Tausche; Janitzia Vazquez-Mellado; Janitzia Vaquez-Mellado; Steven A Yarows; William J Taylor Journal: Arthritis Rheumatol Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 10.995
Authors: Tuhina Neogi; Tim L Th A Jansen; Nicola Dalbeth; Jaap Fransen; H Ralph Schumacher; Dianne Berendsen; Melanie Brown; Hyon Choi; N Lawrence Edwards; Hein J E M Janssens; Frédéric Lioté; Raymond P Naden; George Nuki; Alexis Ogdie; Fernando Perez-Ruiz; Kenneth Saag; Jasvinder A Singh; John S Sundy; Anne-Kathrin Tausche; Janitzia Vaquez-Mellado; Steven A Yarows; William J Taylor Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Mats Dehlin; Panagiota Drivelegka; Valgerdur Sigurdardottir; Anna Svärd; Lennart T H Jacobsson Journal: Arthritis Res Ther Date: 2016-07-13 Impact factor: 5.156