Khalid B Almutairi1, Johannes C Nossent2, David B Preen3, Helen I Keen4, Charles A Inderjeeth2. 1. K.B. Almutairi, MClinPharm, MHA, PhD student, King Fahd Specialist Hospital, Burydah, Saudi Arabia; khalid.almutairi@research.uwa.edu.au. 2. J.C. Nossent, FRACP, MD, PhD, Professor, C.A. Inderjeeth, MBChB, MPH, MRACP, FRACP, NHMRC/NICS Fellow, Professor, School of Medicine, The University of Western Australia, and Department of Rheumatology, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Perth, Australia. 3. D.B. Preen, BSc, PhD, Professor, School of Population and Global Health, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia. 4. H.I. Keen, MBBS, FRACP, Rheumatology Consultant, School of Medicine, The University of Western Australia, Perth, and Fiona Stanley Hospital, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from international population-based studies and investigate the influence of prevalence definition, data sources, classification criteria, and geographical area on RA prevalence. METHODS: A search of ProQuest, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and EMBASE was undertaken to identify population-based studies investigating RA prevalence between 1980 and 2019. Studies were reviewed using the Joanna Briggs Institute approach for the systematic review and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. RESULTS: Sixty studies met the inclusion criteria. There was a wide range of point prevalence reported (0.00-2.70%) with a mean of 0.56% (SD 0.51) between 1986 and 2014, and a mean period prevalence of 0.51% (SD 0.35) between 1955 and 2015. RA point and period prevalence was higher in urban settings (0.69% vs 0.48%) than in rural settings (0.54% vs 0.25%). An RA diagnosis validated by rheumatologists yielded the highest period prevalence of RA and was observed in linked databases (0.80%, SD 0.1). CONCLUSION: The literature reports a wide range of point and period prevalence based on population and method of data collection, but average point and period prevalence of RA were 51 in 10,000 and 56 in 10,000, respectively. Higher urban vs rural prevalence may be biased due to poor case findings in areas with less healthcare or differences in risk environment. The population database studies were more consistent than sampling studies, and linked databases in different continents appeared to provide a consistent estimate of RA period prevalence, confirming the high value of rheumatologist diagnosis as classification criteria.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the prevalence of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from international population-based studies and investigate the influence of prevalence definition, data sources, classification criteria, and geographical area on RA prevalence. METHODS: A search of ProQuest, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and EMBASE was undertaken to identify population-based studies investigating RA prevalence between 1980 and 2019. Studies were reviewed using the Joanna Briggs Institute approach for the systematic review and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. RESULTS: Sixty studies met the inclusion criteria. There was a wide range of point prevalence reported (0.00-2.70%) with a mean of 0.56% (SD 0.51) between 1986 and 2014, and a mean period prevalence of 0.51% (SD 0.35) between 1955 and 2015. RA point and period prevalence was higher in urban settings (0.69% vs 0.48%) than in rural settings (0.54% vs 0.25%). An RA diagnosis validated by rheumatologists yielded the highest period prevalence of RA and was observed in linked databases (0.80%, SD 0.1). CONCLUSION: The literature reports a wide range of point and period prevalence based on population and method of data collection, but average point and period prevalence of RA were 51 in 10,000 and 56 in 10,000, respectively. Higher urban vs rural prevalence may be biased due to poor case findings in areas with less healthcare or differences in risk environment. The population database studies were more consistent than sampling studies, and linked databases in different continents appeared to provide a consistent estimate of RA period prevalence, confirming the high value of rheumatologist diagnosis as classification criteria.
Authors: Elizabeth M Badley; Jessica M Wilfong; Christina H Chan; Mayilee Canizares; Anthony V Perruccio Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-06-21 Impact factor: 3.752
Authors: Khalid Almutairi; Charles Inderjeeth; David B Preen; Helen Keen; Katrina Rogers; Johannes Nossent Journal: Rheumatol Int Date: 2021-02-23 Impact factor: 2.631
Authors: Lauren Prisco; Matthew Moll; Jiaqi Wang; Brian D Hobbs; Weixing Huang; Lily W Martin; Vanessa L Kronzer; Sicong Huang; Edwin K Silverman; Tracy J Doyle; Michael H Cho; Jeffrey A Sparks Journal: Arthritis Rheumatol Date: 2021-09-26 Impact factor: 10.995
Authors: Eliana Lara-Barba; María Jesús Araya; Charlotte Nicole Hill; Felipe A Bustamante-Barrientos; Alexander Ortloff; Cynthia García; Felipe Galvez-Jiron; Carolina Pradenas; Noymar Luque-Campos; Gabriela Maita; Roberto Elizondo-Vega; Farida Djouad; Ana María Vega-Letter; Patricia Luz-Crawford Journal: Front Immunol Date: 2021-11-01 Impact factor: 7.561