Dissemination and evaluation of the ASAS/EULAR recommendations for the management of ankylosing spondylitis: results of a study among 1507 rheumatologists
2008

Study on ASAS/EULAR Recommendations for Ankylosing Spondylitis Management

Sample size: 1507 publication 10 minutes Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): L Gossec, M Dougados, C Phillips, M Hammoudeh, K de Vlam, K Pavelka, T Pham, J Braun, J Sieper, I Olivieri, D van der Heijde, E Collantes, M Stone, T K Kvien

Primary Institution: Paris Descartes University

Hypothesis

How well do rheumatologists agree with and apply the ASAS/EULAR recommendations for managing ankylosing spondylitis?

Conclusion

The study shows very high conceptual agreement with the ASAS/EULAR recommendations among rheumatologists, but highlights inequalities in access to healthcare for patients with ankylosing spondylitis in Europe.

Supporting Evidence

  • 7206 questionnaires were sent out, with a 21% response rate.
  • 62% of the respondents were men, with a mean age of 49 years.
  • Conceptual agreement with the recommendations was high, averaging 8.9 out of 10.
  • Self-reported application of the recommendations was also high, averaging 8.2 out of 10.
  • Barriers to application included funding issues and lack of patient compliance.

Takeaway

Doctors mostly agree on how to treat a disease called ankylosing spondylitis, but some have trouble using the recommended treatments.

Methodology

A questionnaire was sent to rheumatologists in 10 countries to assess their agreement with and application of the recommendations.

Potential Biases

Selection bias may have occurred as the list of respondents was determined by national investigators.

Limitations

The response rate was low at 21%, and the sample may not represent all rheumatologists.

Participant Demographics

62% of respondents were men, with a mean age of 49 years and 34% holding academic positions.

Statistical Information

P-Value

0.028

Confidence Interval

1.03 to 1.72

Statistical Significance

p<0.05

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1136/ard.2007.080077

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication