Sara Tenti1, Fabio Ferretti2, Roberto Gusinu3, Ines Gallo1, Stefano Giannotti4, Andrea Pozza2, Antonella Fioravanti5, Anna Coluccia2. 1. Clinic for the diagnosis and management of Hand Osteoarthritis, Rheumatology Unit, Department of Medicine, Surgery and Neuroscience, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Senese, Policlinico Le Scotte, Viale Bracci 1, 53100, Siena, Italy. 2. Department of Medical Sciences, Surgery and Neurosciences, Santa Maria alle Scotte University Hospital of Siena, Viale Bracci 1, 53100, Siena, Italy. 3. Health Service Management Board, Santa Maria alle Scotte University Hospital, Siena, Italy. 4. Orthopedics and Traumatology Unit, Department of Medicine, Surgery and Neurosciences, University of Siena, Policlinico Le Scotte, Viale Bracci 1, 53100, Siena, Italy. 5. Clinic for the diagnosis and management of Hand Osteoarthritis, Rheumatology Unit, Department of Medicine, Surgery and Neuroscience, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Senese, Policlinico Le Scotte, Viale Bracci 1, 53100, Siena, Italy. fioravanti7@virgilio.it.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The study was aimed to compare the impact of thumb base osteoarthritis (TBOA) on pain, function, and quality of life in patients with erosive or non-erosive hand osteoarthritis (HOA). METHODS: This observational retrospective study included 232 patients: 64 with erosive HOA (EHOA) and concomitant TBOA, 36 with isolated EHOA, 97 with non-erosive HOA (non-EHOA) and TBOA, and 35 with isolated non-EHOA. Hand pain by a visual analogue scale (VAS), Functional Index for Hand Osteoarthritis (FIHOA) score, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form (SF-36), and the possible correlations between VAS and FIHOA with radiological score were assessed. RESULTS: No differences were found between EHOA with TBOA and isolated EHOA in VAS and FIHOA scores; opposite, there was a significant difference in VAS (p < 0.01) and FIHOA (p < 0.001) between subjects with non-EHOA and TBOA and patients with only non-EHOA. VAS and FIHOA values resulted slightly higher in patients with EHOA and TBOA vs non-EHOA and TBOA; they were significantly more elevated in EHOA and TBOA group compared to isolated non-EHOA (p ≤ 0.001) and in isolated EHOA vs isolated non-EHOA (p < 0.01 and p < 0.001, respectively). HAQ, SF-36 resulted significantly better in isolated non-EHOA patients compared to the other groups. Finally, we observed a significant correlation between FIHOA and all the Kallman scales in EHOA patients with TBOA and between FIHOA and Kallman's thumb score in non-EHOA-TBOA group. CONCLUSIONS: EHOA has a more severe clinical burden than non-EHOA; the presence of TBOA appeared an important determinant of pain and disability in non-EHOA.Key Points• Each subset of HOA can have a different impact on pain and functionality, with EHOA determining more severe effects on hand symptoms and disability than non-EHOA.• The presence of TBOA appeared an important determinant of pain and disability in non-EHOA, but not in EHOA.• Our findings support the need for an individualized therapy for each phenotype of hand osteoarthritis.
OBJECTIVE: The study was aimed to compare the impact of thumb base osteoarthritis (TBOA) on pain, function, and quality of life in patients with erosive or non-erosive hand osteoarthritis (HOA). METHODS: This observational retrospective study included 232 patients: 64 with erosive HOA (EHOA) and concomitant TBOA, 36 with isolated EHOA, 97 with non-erosive HOA (non-EHOA) and TBOA, and 35 with isolated non-EHOA. Hand pain by a visual analogue scale (VAS), Functional Index for Hand Osteoarthritis (FIHOA) score, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form (SF-36), and the possible correlations between VAS and FIHOA with radiological score were assessed. RESULTS: No differences were found between EHOA with TBOA and isolated EHOA in VAS and FIHOA scores; opposite, there was a significant difference in VAS (p < 0.01) and FIHOA (p < 0.001) between subjects with non-EHOA and TBOA and patients with only non-EHOA. VAS and FIHOA values resulted slightly higher in patients with EHOA and TBOA vs non-EHOA and TBOA; they were significantly more elevated in EHOA and TBOA group compared to isolated non-EHOA (p ≤ 0.001) and in isolated EHOA vs isolated non-EHOA (p < 0.01 and p < 0.001, respectively). HAQ, SF-36 resulted significantly better in isolated non-EHOApatients compared to the other groups. Finally, we observed a significant correlation between FIHOA and all the Kallman scales in EHOApatients with TBOA and between FIHOA and Kallman's thumb score in non-EHOA-TBOA group. CONCLUSIONS:EHOA has a more severe clinical burden than non-EHOA; the presence of TBOA appeared an important determinant of pain and disability in non-EHOA.Key Points• Each subset of HOA can have a different impact on pain and functionality, with EHOA determining more severe effects on hand symptoms and disability than non-EHOA.• The presence of TBOA appeared an important determinant of pain and disability in non-EHOA, but not in EHOA.• Our findings support the need for an individualized therapy for each phenotype of hand osteoarthritis.
Entities:
Keywords:
Erosive hand osteoarthritis; FIHOA; Hand osteoarthritis; Pain; Quality of life; Thumb base osteoarthritis
Authors: Jessica Bijsterbosch; Willemien Visser; Herman M Kroon; Tanja Stamm; Ingrid Meulenbelt; Tom W J Huizinga; Margreet Kloppenburg Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2010-02-02 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Elena Spacek; Serge Poiraudeau; Fouad Fayad; Marie-Martine Lefèvre-Colau; Johann Beaudreuil; François Rannou; Jacques Fermanian; Michel Revel Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 6.576
Authors: A Fioravanti; S Cheleschi; A De Palma; O Addimanda; L Mancarella; E Pignotti; L Pulsatelli; M Galeazzi; R Meliconi Journal: Biomarkers Date: 2017-11-22 Impact factor: 2.658
Authors: Benjamin J F Dean; Stefan Kluzek; Andrew J Carr; Sally Hopewell; Duncan Richards; Nicholas Riley; Andrew Cuff Journal: Rheumatology (Oxford) Date: 2021-09-01 Impact factor: 7.046
Authors: Ciro Conversano; Graziella Orrù; Andrea Pozza; Mario Miccoli; Rebecca Ciacchini; Laura Marchi; Angelo Gemignani Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-03-11 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Raquel Cantero-Téllez; David Pérez-Cruzado; Jorge Hugo Villafañe; Santiago García-Orza; Nancy Naughton; Kristin Valdes Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-03-17 Impact factor: 3.390