The revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) were formulated from a computerized analysis of 262 contemporary, consecutively studied patients with RA and 262 control subjects with rheumatic diseases other than RA (non-RA). The new criteria are as follows: 1) morning stiffness in and around joints lasting at least 1 hour before maximal improvement; 2) soft tissue swelling (arthritis) of 3 or more joint areas observed by a physician; 3) swelling (arthritis) of the proximal interphalangeal, metacarpophalangeal, or wrist joints; 4) symmetric swelling (arthritis); 5) rheumatoid nodules; 6) the presence of rheumatoid factor; and 7) radiographic erosions and/or periarticular osteopenia in hand and/or wrist joints. Criteria 1 through 4 must have been present for at least 6 weeks. Rheumatoid arthritis is defined by the presence of 4 or more criteria, and no further qualifications (classic, definite, or probable) or list of exclusions are required. In addition, a "classification tree" schema is presented which performs equally as well as the traditional (4 of 7) format. The new criteria demonstrated 91-94% sensitivity and 89% specificity for RA when compared with non-RA rheumatic disease control subjects.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/art.1780310302

The American Rheumatism Association 1987 revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis.

The 1971 preliminary criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) were revised and updated to incorporate new immunologic knowledge and improve disease classification. The 1982 revised criteria include fluorescence antinuclear antibody and antibody to native DNA and Sm antigen. Some criteria involving the same organ systems were aggregated into single criteria. Raynaud's phenomenon and alopecia were not included in the 1982 revised criteria because of low sensitivity and specificity. The new criteria were 96% sensitive and 96% specific when tested with SLE and control patient data gathered from 18 participating clinics. When compared with the 1971 criteria, the 1982 revised criteria showed gains in sensitivity and specificity.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/art.1780251101

The 1982 revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus

K/DOQI clinical practice guidelines for chronic kidney disease: Evaluation, classification, and stratification

In 1982, the Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)published revised criteria for the classification of systemiclupus erythematosus (SLE) (1). During the ensuing decade several investigators, including Drs. Graham Hughes and Donato Alarcon-Segovia, among others, have described the presence and clinical associations or antiphospholipid antibodies in patients with SLE, as well as the occurrence of theprimary antiphospholipid syndrome (2-5). In 1992, Piette and colleagues suggested that the ACR revised criteria be reevaluated in light of the above discoveries (6).

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/art.1780400928

Updating the American College of Rheumatology revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus.

To develop criteria for the classification of fibromyalgia, we studied 558 consecutive patients: 293 patients with fibromyalgia and 265 control patients. Interviews and examinations were performed by trained, blinded assessors. Control patients for the group with primary fibromyalgia were matched for age and sex, and limited to patients with disorders that could be confused with primary fibromyalgia. Control patients for the group with secondary-concomitant fibromyalgia were matched for age, sex, and concomitant rheumatic disorders. Widespread pain (axial plus upper and lower segment plus left- and right-sided pain) was found in 97.6% of all patients with fibromyalgia and in 69.1% of all control patients. The combination of widespread pain and mild or greater tenderness in greater than or equal to 11 of 18 tender point sites yielded a sensitivity of 88.4% and a specificity of 81.1%. Primary fibromyalgia patients and secondary-concomitant fibromyalgia patients did not differ statistically in any major study variable, and the criteria performed equally well in patients with and those without concomitant rheumatic conditions. The newly proposed criteria for the classification of fibromyalgia are 1) widespread pain in combination with 2) tenderness at 11 or more of the 18 specific tender point sites. No exclusions are made for the presence of concomitant radiographic or laboratory abnormalities. At the diagnostic or classification level, the distinction between primary fibromyalgia and secondary-concomitant fibromyalgia (as defined in the text) is abandoned.

https://www.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/art.1780330203

The American College of Rheumatology 1990 Criteria for the Classification of Fibromyalgia. Report of the Multicenter Criteria Committee.

A randomized, double-blind, crossover study comparing the efficacy of intra-arterially administered reserpine with physiological saline was undertaken in 12 patients with progressive systemic sclerosis and four with overlap syndromes with predominant features of scleroderma. Patients were treated for either refractory digital ulcers or severe, incapacitating Raynaud phenomenon. Ten of 16 patients showed improvement with the injections. Favorable responses occurred in 12 of 26 patients given placebo injections and 12 of 25 patients given reserpine injections. No difference in efficacy between intra-arterial administration of reserpine and saline could be ascertained.

Intra-arterially administered reserpine and saline in scleroderma.

In recent years, outcome, or health status, measurement has received wide attention in rheumatology. These measures are based on the concept of maintaining or improving health as the goal of medical care, the World Health Organization (WHO) definition of health, and measurement of those factors that directly impact the patient rather than the traditional measures of disease process. Within this framework, outcomes important to the patient with rheumatic diseases have been identified. They have been conceptualized in general terms of physical, psychological and social functioning or specificallyy by dimensions of death, disability, discomfort, side effects and economic costs. Two widely used outcome measures, the health assessment questionnaire (HAQ) and the arthritis impact measurement scales (AIMS), are described. Outcomes are measured by patient self-reported questionnaires which have been rigorously tested to establish the measurement properties of reliability and validity. Results show that patient self-report is valid, outcomes are accurately measured, correlate with traditional endpoints, and are sensitive to change over time. These measures are particularly suited for use in follow-up studies because of their simplicity, ease of administration, and cost. Future directions include additional study to define clinically meaningful change, extension of validations to many of the rheumatic diseases, the design of special purpose questionnaires and the development of the cumulative outcome concept.

The present and future of comprehensive outcome measures for rheumatic diseases

Antihypertensive treatment may be life saving in scleroderma renal crisis. Patients surviving such crises frequently have had dramatic improvement in the dermal manifestations of their scleroderma. To investigate the potential role of antihypertensive treatment in nonhypertensive patients we randomly assigned 28 patients with systemic sclerosis into drug (14) and placebo (14) groups, using blocked randomisation , and followed them up in a prospective, double-blind clinical trial for 24 months. Overall, both groups improved slightly, with both subjective and objective markers. There were no statistically significant differences and no clinically meaningful trends between the 2 groups, except that the blood pressure was reduced in the group on the active drug.

https://ard.bmj.com/content/annrheumdis/43/3/407.full.pdf

A controlled trial of antihypertensive therapy in systemic sclerosis (scleroderma).

The Compression of Morbidity paradigm seeks to reduce lifetime illness and morbidity by compressing the dominant morbidity, that of the senior years, between an increasing age of onset of morbidity and a more slowly increasing average age at death. Fractures, often associated with osteoporosis, cause a substantial part of this morbidity. For morbidity resulting from fractures to be reduced, the age-specific incidence of fractures needs to decline, since treatment of fractures after they occur is not likely to prove a major benefit. Thus, the risk factors need to be identified and appropriate preventive interventions undertaken. The medical model seeks to diagnose, then to treat those with disease. In considering prevention, many apply the medical model. The disease is "osteoporosis", we must identify people with this disease and then treat them. The public health model, in contrast, seeks to prevent "disease" in all susceptibles. The disease is "morbidity resulting from fractures". The fatal flaws in the medical screening approach will be discussed, together with a lament that this conference was not entitled: "Recent Progress in the Prevention of Morbidity Associated with Fractures". Osteoporosis is only one of many factors associated with increased morbidity resulting from fractures. A fracture management model for reduction in this morbidity will be presented. Osteoporosis finds its genesis in many well-identified risk factors, including age, sex, estrogen levels, and exercise levels, together with positive (e.g. calcium, estrogen) and negative (corticosteroids) effects of medications. Falls, the other main branch of the model, find their genesis is such risk factor as slippery floors, medication side effects, and co-morbid conditions, often with their own antecedent risk factors. Together, over twenty preventable risk factors contribute to the major morbidity associated with fractures.

James F. Fries

Papers

Intra-arterially administered reserpine and saline in scleroderma.

The present and future of comprehensive outcome measures for rheumatic diseases

A controlled trial of antihypertensive therapy in systemic sclerosis (scleroderma).

Prevention of osteoporotic fractures: possibilities, the role of exercise, and limitations

Simultaneous vasculitis in a mother and newborn infant.