Tab Application Banner
  • Users Online: 2504
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 


 
 Table of Contents  
LETTER TO EDITOR
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 13  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 75

Comment on: A comparison of 3 rheumatoid arthritis disease activity indices in routine clinical practice


Department of Clinical Immunology, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India

Date of Web Publication26-Feb-2018

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Durga Prasanna Misra
Department of Clinical Immunology, C-Block, 2nd Floor, Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Rae Bareily Road, Lucknow - 226 014, Uttar Pradesh
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/injr.injr_152_17

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Misra DP, Agarwal V. Comment on: A comparison of 3 rheumatoid arthritis disease activity indices in routine clinical practice. Indian J Rheumatol 2018;13:75

How to cite this URL:
Misra DP, Agarwal V. Comment on: A comparison of 3 rheumatoid arthritis disease activity indices in routine clinical practice. Indian J Rheumatol [serial online] 2018 [cited 2019 Aug 22];13:75. Available from: http://www.indianjrheumatol.com/text.asp?2018/13/1/75/226152



Dear Editor,

We read with great interest the recent paper by Das et al.[1] evaluating the Rapid Assessment of Patient Index Data 3 (RAPID 3) in relation to the disease activity score using 28 joints (DAS28) and Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) in Indian patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The present paper,[1] along with another recent article published in the journal, which had assessed the RA Disease Activity Index-5 in comparison to DAS28 and CDAI,[2] reaffirms the utility of such indices filled by patients in the management of RA in an Indian scenario. The RAPID 3 has the advantage of being filled by the patient alone without inputs from the treating physician, therefore, may help save valuable time in busy clinics, bypassing the need to perform a full 28-joint count, as the authors have themselves said.[1] In this context, it is important to emphasize that it is critical to assess disease activity in a patient with RA, and less important which index is used to do this, as long as the same index is used every time for the individual patient, with the target of therapy being attainment of either low disease activity or remission.[3]

The authors used a version of the RAPID3 in Bengali for the assessment of some of their patients.[1] This highlights another important issue in the management of RA in an Indian scenario. Validated versions of various questionnaires in different rheumatic diseases are lacking in various Indian vernaculars and attempts should be made by the Indian Rheumatology community to translate and validate commonly used patient-reported indices in different languages to enable their widespread application for Indian patients.

A deficiency in commonly used indices for the assessment of disease activity in RA in daily practice, including the RAPID 3 and the DAS28, is a lack of assessment of foot joint involvement. RA may begin with the involvement of the foot in up to a seventh of individuals with RA,[4] with about one-half of patients reporting foot involvement at some stage.[4] Involvement of feet in RA also results in a poorer quality of life.[5] The sociocultural and economic milieu in India driving use of footwear or lack thereof in different situations might result in greater stresses on the foot. Therefore, assessing foot joints may be of greater importance in Indian patients with RA and is an avenue for further research.

Therefore, the paper by Das et al.[1] is a welcome attempt to help assess the use of a patient-reported disease activity index in an Indian scenario. The authors are of the opinion that such research focusing on India-centric problems in the treatment of rheumatic diseases such as managing increasingly busy outdoor services efficiently should be encouraged.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
  References Top

1.
Das A, Sarkar R, Das C, Baisya R, Bhattacharjee U, Biswas P, et al. A comparison of 3 rheumatoid arthritis disease activity indices in routine clinical practice. Indian J Rheumatol 2017;12:209-13.  Back to cited text no. 1
  [Full text]  
2.
Singh H, Tanwar VS, Sukhija G, Mathur R, Kaur P. Rheumatoid arthritis disease activity index-5: Utility in busy clinical settings. Indian J Rheumatol 2017;12:72-5.  Back to cited text no. 2
  [Full text]  
3.
Parida JR, Misra DP, Wakhlu A, Agarwal V. Is non-biological treatment of rheumatoid arthritis as good as biologics? World J Orthop 2015;6:278-83.  Back to cited text no. 3
[PUBMED]    
4.
Borman P, Ayhan F, Tuncay F, Sahin M. Foot problems in a group of patients with rheumatoid arthritis: An unmet need for foot care. Open Rheumatol J 2012;6:290-5.  Back to cited text no. 4
[PUBMED]    
5.
Wickman AM, Pinzur MS, Kadanoff R, Juknelis D. Health-related quality of life for patients with rheumatoid arthritis foot involvement. Foot Ankle Int 2004;25:19-26.  Back to cited text no. 5
    




 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed491    
    Printed14    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded70    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal


[TAG2]
[TAG3]
[TAG4]