Browsing by Author "Ramiro, S"
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- Applying science in practice: the optimization of biological therapy in rheumatoid arthritisPublication . Ramiro, S; Machado, P; Singh, JA; Landewé, RB; Pereira da Silva, JAMost authorities recommend starting biological agents upon failure of at least one disease-modifying agent in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. However, owing to the absence of head-to-head studies, there is little guidance about which biological to select. Still, the practicing clinician has to decide. This review explores the application of published evidence to practice, discussing the goals of treatment, the (in) ability to predict individual responses to therapy, and the potential value of indirect comparisons. We suggest that cycling of biological agents, until remission is achieved or until the most effective agent for that individual patient is determined, deserves consideration in the current stage of knowledge.
- Patients- and physicians- priorities for improvement: The case of rheumatic diseasesPublication . Pereira da Silva, JA; Ramiro, S; Pedro, S; Rodrigues, A; Vasconcelos, JC; Benito-Garcia, EOBJECTIVES: To compare the health priorities elected by patients with rheumatic diseases and by their attending rheumatologists. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We undertook a cross-sectional study among patients and rheumatologists in Portuguese rheumatology outpatient clinics. 75% of all Portuguese Rheumatology Departments agreed to participate. Rheumatologists from non-participating hospital departments were asked to collaborate through their private practices. All patients were eligible for inclusion except if they were under 18 years of age or had a mental disorder that would affect their participation. Data were collected through dedicated questionnaires. Patients were asked to indicate 3 priorities for improvement out of 12 health domains (Arthritis Impact Measurement Scale 2) regarding their rheumatic disease. Rheumatologists were asked similar questions focused around rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and osteoarthritis (OA). RESULTS: 1,868 patients and 56 rheumatologists entered the study. The most commonly selected priorities by patients with rheumatic diseases were: "Rheumatic pain" (70%), "Walking and bending" (45%), and "Hand and Finger Function" (40%). The main priority for improvement among patients with RA was "Rheumatic Pain" (69%), while rheumatologists more commonly elected "Work" (55%) as their main priority for these patients. Among patients with OA, "Rheumatic Pain" was the first priority for both patients and doctors (elected by 75%, and 55% of respondents, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed discordance between the priorities for improvement elected by patients and by their respective physicians. This was more pronounced in RA than in OA. Studying and addressing such differences may support physicians and institutions to better achieve the prime goal of incorporating and responding to patients' needs and preferences.
- Prognostic factors for recovery and non-recovery in patients with non-specific neck pain: a protocol for a systematic literature reviewPublication . Domingues, L; Cruz, EB; Pimentel-Santos, FM; Ramiro, S; Donato, H; Manica, SR; Hayden, JA; Buchbinder, R; Branco, JCINTRODUCTION: Neck pain is a common musculoskeletal disorder worldwide. It can result in significant disability and impaired quality of life. More than 50% of patients with neck pain still report symptoms 1 year later despite receiving different forms of non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatment. Identifying patient characteristics that are modifiable or predict recovery and non-recovery for an individual patient might identify ways of improving outcomes. This systematic review aims to comprehensively summarise the existing evidence regarding baseline patient characteristics associated with recovery and non-recovery, as defined by measures of pain intensity, disability and global perceived improvement. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Six electronic databases, PubMed, CINAHL, PEDro Database, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Web of Science, will be searched, with terms related to the review question such as neck pain, prognostic or predictive research, from inception to 28 September of 2018. Studies will be included if they have investigated an association between patient characteristics and outcomes, with at least one follow-up time point. Two independent reviewers will screen the titles and abstracts followed by a full-text review to assess papers regarding their eligibility. Data from included papers will be extracted using standardised forms, including study and participants' characteristics, outcomes, prognostic factors and effect size of the association. The risk of bias of each study will be assessed using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool. A narrative synthesis will be conducted considering the strength, consistency of results and the methodological quality. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This systematic review does not require ethical approval. The results will be disseminated through publication in a peer-review journal, as a chapter of a doctoral thesis and through presentations at national and international conferences.