Objective
To provide a single source for the best available estimates of the US prevalence of and number of individuals affected by osteoarthritis, polymyalgia rheumatica and giant cell arteritis, gout, fibromyalgia, and carpal tunnel syndrome, as well as the symptoms of neck and back pain. A companion article (part I) addresses additional conditions.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/art.23177

Estimates of the prevalence of arthritis and other rheumatic conditions in the United States. Part II.

OBJECTIVE
To provide a single source for the best available estimates of the US prevalence of and number of individuals affected by osteoarthritis, polymyalgia rheumatica and giant cell arteritis, gout, fibromyalgia, and carpal tunnel syndrome, as well as the symptoms of neck and back pain. A companion article (part I) addresses additional conditions.


METHODS
The National Arthritis Data Workgroup reviewed published analyses from available national surveys, such as the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey and the National Health Interview Survey. Because data based on national population samples are unavailable for most specific rheumatic conditions, we derived estimates from published studies of smaller, defined populations. For specific conditions, the best available prevalence estimates were applied to the corresponding 2005 US population estimates from the Census Bureau, to estimate the number affected with each condition.


RESULTS
We estimated that among US adults, nearly 27 million have clinical osteoarthritis (up from the estimate of 21 million for 1995), 711,000 have polymyalgia rheumatica, 228,000 have giant cell arteritis, up to 3.0 million have had self-reported gout in the past year (up from the estimate of 2.1 million for 1995), 5.0 million have fibromyalgia, 4-10 million have carpal tunnel syndrome, 59 million have had low back pain in the past 3 months, and 30.1 million have had neck pain in the past 3 months.


CONCLUSION
Estimates for many specific rheumatic conditions rely on a few, small studies of uncertain generalizability to the US population. This report provides the best available prevalence estimates for the US, but for most specific conditions more studies generalizable to the US or addressing understudied populations are needed.

National Arthritis Data Work-group. Estimates of the prevalence of arthritis and other rheumatic conditions in the United States. Part II

HEALTH-related quality of life (HRQL) is increasingly used as an outcome in clinical trials, effectiveness research, and research on quality of care. Factors that have facilitated this increased usage include the accumulating evidence that measures of HRQL are valid and "reliable,"1the publication of several large clinical trials showing that these outcome measures are responsive to important clinical changes,2-5and the successful development and testing of shorter instruments that are easier to understand and administer.6-13Because these measures describe or characterize what the patient has experienced as the result of medical care, they are useful and important supplements to traditional physiological or biological measures of health status. Given this improved ability to assess patients' health status, how can physicians and health care systems intervene to improve HRQL? Implicit in the use of measures of HRQL in clinical trials and in effectiveness research is the concept that clinical

Linking clinical variables with health-related quality of life. A conceptual model of patient outcomes

Aims and objectives.  This review aims to explore the research available relating to three commonly used pain rating scales, the Visual Analogue Scale, the Verbal Rating Scale and the Numerical Rating Scale. The review provides information needed to understand the main properties of the scales.

Background.  Data generated from pain-rating scales can be easily misunderstood. This review can help clinicians to understand the main features of these tools and thus use them effectively.

Method.  A MedLine review via PubMed was carried out with no restriction of age of papers retrieved. Papers were examined for methodological soundness before being included. The search terms initially included pain rating scales, pain measurement, Visual Analogue Scale, VAS, Verbal Rating Scale, VRS, Numerical/numeric Rating Scale, NRS. The reference lists of retrieved articles were used to generate more papers and search terms. Only English Language papers were examined.

Conclusions.  All three pain-rating scales are valid, reliable and appropriate for use in clinical practice, although the Visual Analogue Scale has more practical difficulties than the Verbal Rating Scale or the Numerical Rating Scale. For general purposes the Numerical Rating Scale has good sensitivity and generates data that can be statistically analysed for audit purposes. Patients who seek a sensitive pain-rating scale would probably choose this one. For simplicity patients prefer the Verbal Rating Scale, but it lacks sensitivity and the data it produces can be misunderstood.

Relevance to clinical practice.  In order to use pain-rating scales well clinicians need to appreciate the potential for error within the tools, and the potential they have to provide the required information. Interpretation of the data from a pain-rating scale is not as straightforward as it might first appear.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2005.01121.x

Pain: a review of three commonly used pain rating scales.

/pdf/chapter-4-european-guidelines-for-the-management-of-chronic-4lrtve55lo.pdf

Chapter 4. European guidelines for the management of chronic nonspecific low back pain.

We performed magnetic resonance imaging on sixty-seven individuals who had never had low-back pain, sciatica, or neurogenic claudication. The scans were interpreted independently by three neuro-radiologists who had no knowledge about the presence or absence of clinical symptoms in the subjects. About one-third of the subjects were found to have a substantial abnormality. Of those who were less than sixty years old, 20 per cent had a herniated nucleus pulposus and one had spinal stenosis. In the group that was sixty years old or older, the findings were abnormal on about 57 per cent of the scans: 36 per cent of the subjects had a herniated nucleus pulposus and 21 per cent had spinal stenosis. There was degeneration or bulging of a disc at at least one lumbar level in 35 per cent of the subjects between twenty and thirty-nine years old and in all but one of the sixty to eighty-year-old subjects. In view of these findings in asymptomatic subjects, we concluded that abnormalities on magnetic resonance images must be strictly correlated with age and any clinical signs and symptoms before operative treatment is contemplated.

Abnormal magnetic-resonance scans of the lumbar spine in asymptomatic subjects. A prospective investigation

To distinguish early magnetic resonance (MR) imaging findings in postoperative diskitis from normal postoperative changes, a prospective study was performed in 15 asymptomatic patients (17 disk levels) who underwent uncomplicated lumbar diskectomy and seven patients with proved postoperative diskitis. On postoperative MR images, four of the asymptomatic patients had a finding that could also be seen in patients with diskitis. Gadolinium enhancement was useful in making the distinction and occurred as follows: (a) vertebral bone marrow: all seven diskitis patients and one asymptomatic patient; (b) disk space: five diskitis patients and three asymptomatic patients; and (c) posterior anulus fibrosus: all seven diskitis patients and 13 asymptomatic patients (14 of 17 levels). This entire triad of findings, which is strongly suggestive of postoperative diskitis, was not seen in any of the asymptomatic patients. Changes in the disk space and adjacent bone marrow on pre- and post-contrast MR images after routine diskectomy are uncommon and should not be assumed to be normal postoperative changes without careful consideration and analysis for early diskitis.

Postoperative diskitis: distinguishing early MR imaging findings from normal postoperative disk space changes.

A prospective study was undertaken to establish the normal spectrum and timing of gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) imaging findings in 15 patients who had resolution of symptoms after successful lumbar disk surgery. Enhancement of the facet joints (in 88% of disk levels) and paraspinal muscles (100%) decreased gradually after surgery. Enhancement of the decompressed nerve root tracked proximally toward the conus medullaris in 62% at 3 weeks and was absent in all by 6 months postoperatively. Areas of intermediate signal intensity with peripheral enhancement and mass effect were seen on T1-weighted images at the site of the original disk herniation in 38% at 3 weeks and 12% at 3 months, despite complete relief of leg pain. These results reveal that even in successfully treated (asymptomatic) patients, residual mass effect on the neural elements may frequently simulate a recurrent or residual disk fragment. There is an orderly progression of imaging changes during the first 6 months after lumbar s...

S W Wiesel

Papers

Abnormal magnetic-resonance scans of the lumbar spine in asymptomatic subjects. A prospective investigation

Postoperative diskitis: distinguishing early MR imaging findings from normal postoperative disk space changes.

Contrast-enhanced MR imaging performed after successful lumbar disk surgery: prospective study.