Prevalence of gout and hyperuricemia in the US general population: the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2007-2008.
TL;DR: The findings from nationally representative samples of US adults suggest that the prevalence of both gout and hyperuricemia remains substantial and may have increased over the past 2 decades, which is likely related to increasing frequencies of adiposity and hypertension.
Abstract: Objective
To estimate the prevalence of gout and hyperuricemia based on the latest nationally representative sample of US men and women (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey [NHANES] 2007–2008).
Methods
Using data from 5,707 participants in NHANES 2007–2008, we estimated the prevalence of gout and hyperuricemia. During home interviews for NHANES 2007–2008, all participants were asked about a history of health professional– or physician-diagnosed gout. Our primary definition of hyperuricemia was a serum urate level of >7.0 mg/dl for men and >5.7 mg/dl for women. We explored potential secular trends in these estimates and their possible explanations by comparing them with estimates based on 18,825 participants in NHANES-III (1988–1994).
Results
The prevalence of gout among US adults in 2007–2008 was 3.9% (8.3 million individuals). The prevalence among men was 5.9% (6.1 million), and the prevalence among women was 2.0% (2.2 million). The mean serum urate levels were 6.14 mg/dl among men and 4.87 mg/dl among women, corresponding to hyperuricemia prevalences of 21.2% and 21.6%, respectively. These estimates were higher than those in NHANES-III, with differences of 1.2% in the prevalence of gout (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.6, 1.9), 0.15 mg/dl in the serum urate level (95% CI 0.07, 0.24), and 3.2% in the prevalence of hyperuricemia (95% CI 1.2, 5.2). These differences were substantially attenuated after adjusting for body mass index and/or hypertension.
Conclusion
These findings from nationally representative samples of US adults suggest that the prevalence of both gout and hyperuricemia remains substantial and may have increased over the past 2 decades, which is likely related to increasing frequencies of adiposity and hypertension.
Citations
More filters
Medical University of Vienna1, Boston University2, Arthritis Research UK3, Johns Hopkins University4, University of California, San Francisco5, Humboldt University of Berlin6, University of Toronto7, National Jewish Health8, Brigham and Women's Hospital9, Paris Descartes University10, University of Leeds11, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart12, Erasmus University Rotterdam13, University of Colorado Denver14, Leiden University15, University of California, San Diego16, University of Massachusetts Medical School17, University of Michigan18, University of Washington19, McGill University Health Centre20, University of Pittsburgh21, Ministry of Health (New Zealand)22, New York University23, University of Manchester24, University of Amsterdam25, University of Kansas26, Women's College Hospital27
TL;DR: This new classification system redefines the current paradigm of RA by focusing on features at earlier stages of disease that are associated with persistent and/or erosive disease, rather than defining the disease by its late-stage features.
Abstract: Objective The 1987 American College of Rheumatology (ACR; formerly the American Rheumatism Association) classifi cation criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have been criticised for their lack of sensitivity in early disease. This work was undertaken to develop new classifi cation criteria for RA. Methods A joint working group from the ACR and the European League Against Rheumatism developed, in three phases, a new approach to classifying RA. The work focused on identifying, among patients newly presenting with undifferentiated infl ammatory synovitis, factors that best discriminated between those who were and those who were not at high risk for persistent and/ or erosive disease—this being the appropriate current paradigm underlying the disease construct ‘RA’. Results In the new criteria set, classifi cation as ‘defi nite RA’ is based on the confi rmed presence of synovitis in at least one joint, absence of an alternative diagnosis better explaining the synovitis, and achievement of a total score of 6 or greater (of a possible 10) from the individual scores in four domains: number and site of involved joints (range 0–5), serological abnormality (range 0–3), elevated acute-phase response (range 0–1) and symptom duration (two levels; range 0–1). Conclusion This new classifi cation system redefi nes the current paradigm of RA by focusing on features at earlier stages of disease that are associated with persistent and/or erosive disease, rather than defi ning the disease by its late-stage features. This will refocus attention on the important need for earlier diagnosis and institution of effective disease-suppressing therapy to prevent or minimise the occurrence of the undesirable sequelae that currently comprise the paradigm underlying the disease construct ‘RA’.
7,120 citations
Medical University of Vienna1, Boston University2, Arthritis Research UK3, Johns Hopkins University4, University of California, San Francisco5, Charité6, University of Toronto7, National Jewish Health8, Harvard University9, University of Paris10, University of Leeds11, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart12, Erasmus University Rotterdam13, University of Colorado Denver14, Leiden University15, University of California, San Diego16, University of Massachusetts Medical School17, University of Michigan18, University of Washington19, McGill University20, University of Pittsburgh21, Ministry of Health (New Zealand)22, New York University23, University of Manchester24, University of Amsterdam25
TL;DR: This new classification system redefines the current paradigm of RA by focusing on features at earlier stages of disease that are associated with persistent and/or erosive disease, rather than defining the disease by its late-stage features.
Abstract: Objective The 1987 American College of Rheumatology (ACR; formerly the American Rheumatism Association) classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have been criticised for their lack of sensitivity in early disease. This work was undertaken to develop new classification criteria for RA. Methods A joint working group from the ACR and the European League Against Rheumatism developed, in three phases, a new approach to classifying RA. The work focused on identifying, among patients newly presenting with undifferentiated inflammatory synovitis, factors that best discriminated between those who were and those who were not at high risk for persistent and/or erosive disease—this being the appropriate current paradigm underlying the disease construct ‘RA’. Results In the new criteria set, classification as ‘definite RA’ is based on the confirmed presence of synovitis in at least one joint, absence of an alternative diagnosis better explaining the synovitis, and achievement of a total score of 6 or greater (of a possible 10) from the individual scores in four domains: number and site of involved joints (range 0–5), serological abnormality (range 0–3), elevated acute-phase response (range 0–1) and symptom duration (two levels; range 0–1). Conclusion This new classification system redefines the current paradigm of RA by focusing on features at earlier stages of disease that are associated with persistent and/or erosive disease, rather than defining the disease by its late-stage features. This will refocus attention on the important need for earlier diagnosis and institution of effective disease-suppressing therapy to prevent or minimise the occurrence of the undesirable sequelae that currently comprise the paradigm underlying the disease construct ‘RA’.
5,964 citations
Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre1, University of Michigan2, Radboud University Nijmegen3, University of Toronto4, McGill University5, University of Basel6, University of Florence7, Auckland City Hospital8, University of Pittsburgh9, Charité10, University of California, Los Angeles11, University College London12, University of Zurich13, University of Paris14, Marche Polytechnic University15, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston16, Newcastle University17, University of Pécs18, Georgetown University19, Istanbul University20, Medical University of Białystok21, University of Giessen22, Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli23, University College Dublin24, Stanford University25, National Health Service26, University of Colorado Denver27, Medical College of Wisconsin28, University of Alabama at Birmingham29, University of Manchester30, Rutgers University31, Thomas Jefferson University32, University of Toledo33, Amgen34, Boston University35, Medical University of South Carolina36, University of Pennsylvania37, Northwestern University38
TL;DR: The ACR/EULAR classification criteria for SSc performed better than the 1980 ACR criteria and should allow for more patients to be classified correctly as having the disease.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: The 1980 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) classification criteria for systemic sclerosis (SSc) lack sensitivity for early SSc and limited cutaneous SSc. The present work, by a joint committee of the ACR and the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR), was undertaken for the purpose of developing new classification criteria for SSc. METHODS: Using consensus methods, 23 candidate items were arranged in a multicriteria additive point system with a threshold to classify cases as SSc. The classification system was reduced by clustering items and simplifying weights. The system was tested by 1) determining specificity and sensitivity in SSc cases and controls with scleroderma-like disorders, and 2) validating against the combined view of a group of experts on a set of cases with or without SSc. RESULTS: It was determined that skin thickening of the fingers extending proximal to the metacarpophalangeal joints is sufficient for the patient to be classified as having SSc; if that is not present, 7 additive items apply, with varying weights for each: skin thickening of the fingers, fingertip lesions, telangiectasia, abnormal nailfold capillaries, interstitial lung disease or pulmonary arterial hypertension, Raynaud's phenomenon, and SSc-related autoantibodies. Sensitivity and specificity in the validation sample were, respectively, 0.91 and 0.92 for the new classification criteria and 0.75 and 0.72 for the 1980 ACR classification criteria. All selected cases were classified in accordance with consensus-based expert opinion. All cases classified as SSc according to the 1980 ACR criteria were classified as SSc with the new criteria, and several additional cases were now considered to be SSc. CONCLUSION: The ACR/EULAR classification criteria for SSc performed better than the 1980 ACR criteria for SSc and should allow for more patients to be classified correctly as having the disease.
2,743 citations
Radboud University Nijmegen1, University of Michigan2, University of Toronto3, McGill University4, University of Basel5, University of Florence6, Auckland City Hospital7, University of Pittsburgh8, Complutense University of Madrid9, Charité10, University of California, Los Angeles11, University College London12, University of Zurich13, University of Paris14, Marche Polytechnic University15, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston16, Newcastle University17, University of Pécs18, Georgetown University19, Istanbul University20, Medical University of Białystok21, University of Giessen22, Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli23, University College Dublin24, Stanford University25, University of Colorado Denver26, Amgen27, Medical College of Wisconsin28, University of Alabama at Birmingham29, University of Manchester30, National Health Service31, Rutgers University32, Thomas Jefferson University33, University of Toledo34, University of Pennsylvania35, Boston University36, Medical University of South Carolina37, Northwestern University38, University of Western Ontario39
TL;DR: The ACR/EULAR classification criteria for SSc performed better than the 1980 ACR criteria and should allow for more patients to be classified correctly as having the disease.
Abstract: Objective The 1980 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) classification criteria for systemic sclerosis (SSc) lack sensitivity for early SSc and limited cutaneous SSc. The present work, by a joint committee of the ACR and the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR), was undertaken for the purpose of developing new classification criteria for SSc. Methods Using consensus methods, 23 candidate items were arranged in a multicriteria additive point system with a threshold to classify cases as SSc. The classification system was reduced by clustering items and simplifying weights. The system was tested by (1) determining specificity and sensitivity in SSc cases and controls with scleroderma-like disorders, and (2) validating against the combined view of a group of experts on a set of cases with or without SSc. Results It was determined that skin thickening of the fingers extending proximal to the metacarpophalangeal joints is sufficient for the patient to be classified as having SSc; if that is not present, seven additive items apply, with varying weights for each: skin thickening of the fingers, fingertip lesions, telangiectasia, abnormal nailfold capillaries, interstitial lung disease or pulmonary arterial hypertension, Raynaud9s phenomenon, and SSc-related autoantibodies. Sensitivity and specificity in the validation sample were, respectively, 0.91 and 0.92 for the new classification criteria and 0.75 and 0.72 for the 1980 ACR classification criteria. All selected cases were classified in accordance with consensus-based expert opinion. All cases classified as SSc according to the 1980 ACR criteria were classified as SSc with the new criteria, and several additional cases were now considered to be SSc. Conclusions The ACR/EULAR classification criteria for SSc performed better than the 1980 ACR criteria for SSc and should allow for more patients to be classified correctly as having the disease.
1,899 citations
University of Michigan1, University of California, Los Angeles2, University of Rochester3, Boston Medical Center4, New York University5, Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation6, University of California, San Diego7, University of Otago8, Paris Diderot University9, University of Alabama at Birmingham10, University of Auckland11, Emory University12, Veterans Health Administration13, University of California, Irvine14, University of Florida15, Cleveland Clinic16, University of Pennsylvania17, Harvard University18
TL;DR: DINESH KHanNA, JOHN D. FITZGERALD, PUJA P. KHANNA, SANGMEE BAE, MANJIT K. SINGH, TUHINA NEOGI, MICHAEL H. PILLINGER, JOAN MERILL, SUSAN LEE, SHRADDHA PRAKASH, MARIAN KALDAS, MANEESH GOGIA, FERNANDO PEREZ-RUI
Abstract: DINESH KHANNA, JOHN D. FITZGERALD, PUJA P. KHANNA, SANGMEE BAE, MANJIT K. SINGH, TUHINA NEOGI, MICHAEL H. PILLINGER, JOAN MERILL, SUSAN LEE, SHRADDHA PRAKASH, MARIAN KALDAS, MANEESH GOGIA, FERNANDO PEREZ-RUIZ, WILL TAYLOR, FREDERIC LIOTE, HYON CHOI, JASVINDER A. SINGH, NICOLA DALBETH, SANFORD KAPLAN, VANDANA NIYYAR, DANIELLE JONES, STEVEN A. YAROWS, BLAKE ROESSLER, GAIL KERR, CHARLES KING, GERALD LEVY, DANIEL E. FURST, N. LAWRENCE EDWARDS, BRIAN MANDELL, H. RALPH SCHUMACHER, MARK ROBBINS, NEIL WENGER, AND ROBERT TERKELTAUB
1,335 citations
Cites background from "Prevalence of gout and hyperuricemi..."
...health-related quality of life are now better appreciated in many gout patients, particularly those with multiple comorbidities and/or chronic gouty arthritis (13,14)....
[...]
References
More filters
TL;DR: This report provides the best available prevalence estimates for the US for osteoarthritis, polymyalgia rheumatica, gout, fibromyalgia, and carpal tunnel syndrome as well as the symptoms of neck and back pain.
Abstract: 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.
4,813 citations
22 Jan 2008
TL;DR: In this paper, 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 are provided.
Abstract: 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.
4,355 citations
TL;DR: In a multiple regression analysis, increasing age, increasing body mass index, and non-Hispanic black race/ethnicity were independently associated with increased rates of hypertension.
Abstract: ContextPrior analyses of National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES)
data through 1991 have suggested that hypertension prevalence is declining,
but more recent self-reported rates of hypertension suggest that the rate
is increasing.ObjectiveTo describe trends in the prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control
of hypertension in the United States using NHANES data.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsSurvey using a stratified multistage probability sample of the civilian
noninstitutionalized population. The most recent NHANES survey, conducted
in 1999-2000 (n = 5448), was compared with the 2 phases of NHANES III conducted
in 1988-1991 (n = 9901) and 1991-1994 (n = 9717). Individuals aged 18 years
or older were included in this analysis.Main Outcome MeasuresHypertension, defined as a measured blood pressure of 140/90 mm Hg or
greater or reported use of antihypertensive medications. Hypertension awareness
and treatment were assessed with standardized questions. Hypertension control
was defined as treatment with antihypertensive medication and a measured blood
pressure of less than 140/90 mm Hg.ResultsIn 1999-2000, 28.7% of NHANES participants had hypertension, an increase
of 3.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0%-8.3%) from 1988-1991. Hypertension
prevalence was highest in non-Hispanic blacks (33.5%), increased with age
(65.4% among those aged ≥60 years), and tended to be higher in women (30.1%).
In a multiple regression analysis, increasing age, increasing body mass index,
and non-Hispanic black race/ethnicity were independently associated with increased
rates of hypertension. Overall, in 1999-2000, 68.9% were aware of their hypertension
(nonsignificant decline of −0.3%; 95% CI, −4.2% to 3.6%), 58.4%
were treated (increase of 6.0%; 95% CI, 1.2%-10.8%), and hypertension was
controlled in 31.0% (increase of 6.4%; 95% CI, 1.6%-11.2%). Women, Mexican
Americans, and those aged 60 years or older had significantly lower rates
of control compared with men, younger individuals, and non-Hispanic whites.ConclusionsContrary to earlier reports, hypertension prevalence is increasing in
the United States. Hypertension control rates, although improving, continue
to be low. Programs targeting hypertension prevention and treatment are of
utmost importance.
2,335 citations
TL;DR: The American Rheumatism Association sub-committe on classification criteria for gout analyzed data from more than 700 patients with gout, pseudogout, rheumatoid arthritis, or septic arthritis to establish criteria for classifying a patient as having gout.
Abstract: The American Rheumatism Association sub-committe on classification criteria for gout analyzed data from more than 700 patients with gout, pseudogout, rheumatoid arthritis, or septic arthritis. Criteria for classifying a patient as having gout were a) the presence of characteristic urate crystals in the joint fluid, and/or b) a topus proved to contain urate crystals by chemical or polarized light microscopic means, and/or c) the presence of six of the twelve clinical, laboratory, and X-ray phenomena listed in Table 5.
1,370 citations
TL;DR: 12 key recommendations for management of gout were developed, using a combination of research based evidence and expert consensus, based on a Delphi consensus approach.
Abstract: Objective: To develop evidence based recommendations for the diagnosis of gout. Methods: The multidisciplinary guideline development group comprised 19 rheumatologists and one evidence based medicine expert, representing 13 European countries. Ten key propositions regarding diagnosis were generated using a Delphi consensus approach. Research evidence was searched systematically for each proposition. Wherever possible the sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio (LR), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were calculated for diagnostic tests. Relative risk and odds ratios were estimated for risk factors and co-morbidities associated with gout. The quality of evidence was categorised according to the evidence hierarchy. The strength of recommendation (SOR) was assessed using the EULAR visual analogue and ordinal scales. Results: 10 key propositions were generated though three Delphi rounds including diagnostic topics in clinical manifestations, urate crystal identification, biochemical tests, radiographs, and risk factors/co-morbidities. Urate crystal identification varies according to symptoms and observer skill but is very likely to be positive in symptomatic gout (LR = 567 (95% confidence interval (CI), 35.5 to 9053)). Classic podagra and presence of tophi have the highest clinical diagnostic value for gout (LR = 30.64 (95% CI, 20.51 to 45.77), and LR = 39.95 (21.06 to 75.79), respectively). Hyperuricaemia is a major risk factor for gout and may be a useful diagnostic marker when defined by the normal range of the local population (LR = 9.74 (7.45 to 12.72)), although some gouty patients may have normal serum uric acid concentrations at the time of investigation. Radiographs have little role in diagnosis, though in late or severe gout radiographic changes of asymmetrical swelling (LR = 4.13 (2.97 to 5.74)) and subcortical cysts without erosion (LR = 6.39 (3.00 to 13.57)) may be useful to differentiate chronic gout from other joint conditions. In addition, risk factors (sex, diuretics, purine-rich foods, alcohol, lead) and co-morbidities (cardiovascular diseases, hypertension, diabetes, obesity, and chronic renal failure) are associated with gout. SOR for each proposition varied according to both the research evidence and expert opinion. Conclusions: 10 key recommendations for diagnosis of gout were developed using a combination of research based evidence and expert consensus. The evidence for diagnostic tests, risk factors, and co-morbidities was evaluated and the strength of recommendation was provided.
1,328 citations