Rheumatoid ArthritisAPRANNCT02556034
Assessment of Tender & Swollen Joints Count Score Performed by a Rheumatologist And Rheumatology Nurses in Patients With RA and PsA.
An observational study of Rheumatoid Arthritis and Psoriatic Arthritis, run by Isabelle Fortin at 1 site in Canada.
Trial summary
This study will establish a comparison in follow-up care of 100 patients between Health Care Practitioners, more specifically the rheumatologist and a trained nurse. The study objective is to show consistency of evaluation between two different health care professionals, a physician and a nurse. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Rheumatoid Arthritis, Psoriatic Arthritis
- What is being tested?
- Disease evaluation.
- How many people
- 80 participants
- Where
- 1 siteCanada
- Study dates
- Sep 2015to 16 Nov 2018
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: The target population will be subjects with active Rheumatoid Arthritis or Psoriatic Arthritis.
Who may be able to join
- Subject is ≥18 years of age.
- Has at least one of the following diagnosis at screening
- Subject has a diagnosis of RA as defined by the 1987- revised American College of Rheumatology (ACR)- classification criteria for RA and has disease duration of more than 6 months.
- Subject must have a diagnosis of active PsA by Classification Criteria for Psoriatic Arthritis (CASPAR) and has disease duration of more than 6 months.
- The subject must be able to provide written informed consent and to complete the study questionnaires.
Who cannot join
- Subject with DIP involvement in PsA
- Subject with predominant axial symptoms (spondyloarthropathy)
- Subject with fibromyalgia
- Subject involved in a concomitant study
- Subject currently takes ≥10 mg cortisone daily
- Subject has taken opioid analgesics within 12 hours of joint count assessment
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Canada1 site
Centre de Rhumatologie de L'Est Du Quebec
Rimouski, Quebec, G5L 8W1
About this study
Official title: Assessment of Tender & Swollen Joints Count Score Performed by a Rheumatologist And Rheumatology Nurses in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA)
This study will establish a comparison in follow-up care of 100 patients between Health Care Practitioners, more specifically the rheumatologist and a trained nurse. The study objective is to show consistency of evaluation between two different health care professionals, a physician and a nurse.
Read the detailed description
This study involves one site in Canada. Patients will complete a self-evaluation of 28 joint counts for swelling (SJC) and tenderness (TJC) and assess their disease activity on a Visual Analog Scale (VAS). A 28 joint count and VAS will then be assessed by a nurse and by a rheumatologist. Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Disease Activity Severity 28 - C Reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) will be calculated from each data set.
The same rheumatologist will examine all patients and two nurses will each randomly assess half the total enrolled patients. The nurse will be blinded to the patient's joint count and VAS, and similarly, the rheumatologist will be blinded to both the patient and nurse's assessments. The setting includes 2 nurses with different educational background: one technician and one bachelor.
The training provided to the nurses in this study allows them to master the basis of the physical exam, joint count and history of the rheumatoid patient as well as to learn the pertinent laboratory parameters. It is a 14-hour course in which the patient is examined through observation, palpation, assessment of mobility and stability and specific movement. Diagnostic tools such as the Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI), Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ), CDAI and DAS-28 are included in the patient evaluation.
Each enrolled patient will receive a 5-minute training in joint assessment by the nurse. The use of the mannequin for joint assessment of swelling and tenderness will be reviewed. Objective signs of disease such as swelling, redness and heat will be explained as well as the difference between inflammation and bony swelling, the latter being indicative of osteoarthritis.
- Conditions
- Rheumatoid Arthritis, Psoriatic Arthritis
- Being tested
- Disease evaluation.
- Medical subject headings
- Arthritis, Rheumatoid, Arthritis, Psoriatic
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Disease evaluation.Other
Patients will complete a self-evaluation of 28 joint counts for swelling and tenderness and assess their disease activity on a Visual Analog Scale. A 28 joint count and VAS will then be assessed by a nurse and by a rheumatologist. The same rheumatologist will examine all patients and two nurses will each randomly assess half the total enrolled patients. The nurse will be blinded to the patient's joint count and VAS, and similarly, the rheumatologist will be blinded to both the patient and nurse's assessments.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Disease evaluation | Rheumatoid arthritis evaluations. Receives: Other: Disease evaluation. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Accuracy of the nurse CDAI result compared to the rheumatologist CDAI result.
To validate the accuracy of assessment of RA and PsA disease activity by a nurse trained in joint examination using the CDAI as compared to a rheumatologist's same assessment. The level of agreement between evaluators will be investigated using Cohen's Kappa, a statistic tool useful to the measurement of inter-rater agreement for qualitative traits.
Measured: 6 months
Accuracy of the nurse DAS-28 result compared to the rheumatologist DAS-28 result.
To validate the accuracy of assessment of RA and PsA disease activity by a nurse trained in joint examination using the DAS-28 as compared to a rheumatologist's same assessment. The level of agreement between evaluators will be investigated using Cohen's Kappa, a statistic tool useful to the measurement of inter-rater agreement for qualitative traits.
Measured: 6 months
Secondary outcomes (4)
Comparison of TJC results between 3 raters.
The TJC results from the patient self-assessment, nurse assessment and physician assessment are compared.
Measured: 6 months
Comparison of SJC results between 3 raters.
The SJC results from the patient self-assessment, nurse assessment and physician assessment are compared.
Measured: 6 months
Comparison of VAS results between 3 raters.
The VAS results from the patient self-assessment, nurse assessment and physician assessment are compared.
Measured: 6 months
Comparison of time taken by 3 raters to perform disease assessments.
To compare the time taken by the rheumatologist, nurse and patient to complete each part of the joint count assessment and the VAS. An ANOVA will be used to verify if a significant difference is present in the assessment time between the different raters.
Measured: 6 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted22 Sep 2015 (estimated)
- Study startSep 2015
- Primary completion16 Nov 2018
- Study completion16 Nov 2018
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (14)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Rheumatoid ArthritisStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Case only
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 80 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Isabelle Fortin
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Janssen Inc.
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Isabelle Fortin, Centre de Rhumatologie de l'Est du Québec
- Investigators
- NABIL CHAKER, BIOLOGIST, Study director, CENTRE DE RHUMATOLOGIE DE L'EST DU QUEBECISABELLE FORTIN, MD, Principal investigator, CENTRE DE RHUMATOLOGIE DE L'EST DU QUEBECFRÉDÉRIC BANVILLE, Ph.D, Principal investigator, Université de Montréal
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02556034
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- CNTO148ART4009
- Acronym
- APRAN
- Status last verified
- Jan 2019
- First submitted
- 15 Sep 2015
- Last updated
- 1 Feb 2019
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Smolen JS, Aletaha D, Bijlsma JW, Breedveld FC, Boumpas D, Burmester G, Combe B, Cutolo M, de Wit M, Dougados M, Emery P, Gibofsky A, Gomez-Reino JJ, Haraoui B, Kalden J, Keystone EC, Kvien TK, McInnes I, Martin-Mola E, Montecucco C, Schoels M, van der Heijde D; T2T Expert Committee. Treating rheumatoid arthritis to target: recommendations of an international task force. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010 Apr;69(4):631-7. doi: 10.1136/ard.2009.123919. Epub 2010 Mar 9.
PubMed 20215140Atar D, Birkeland KI, Uhlig T. 'Treat to target': moving targets from hypertension, hyperlipidaemia and diabetes to rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010 Apr;69(4):629-30. doi: 10.1136/ard.2010.128462. No abstract available.
PubMed 20237122Anderson J, Caplan L, Yazdany J, Robbins ML, Neogi T, Michaud K, Saag KG, O'Dell JR, Kazi S. Rheumatoid arthritis disease activity measures: American College of Rheumatology recommendations for use in clinical practice. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2012 May;64(5):640-7. doi: 10.1002/acr.21649.
PubMed 22473918Scott IC, Scott DL. Joint counts in inflammatory arthritis. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2014 Sep-Oct;32(5 Suppl 85):S-7-12. Epub 2014 Oct 30.
PubMed 25365082Radner H, Grisar J, Smolen JS, Stamm T, Aletaha D. Value of self-performed joint counts in rheumatoid arthritis patients near remission. Arthritis Res Ther. 2012 Mar 14;14(2):R61. doi: 10.1186/ar3777.
PubMed 22417647Cheung PP, Ruyssen-Witrand A, Gossec L, Paternotte S, Le Bourlout C, Mazieres M, Dougados M. Reliability of patient self-evaluation of swollen and tender joints in rheumatoid arthritis: A comparison study with ultrasonography, physician, and nurse assessments. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2010 Aug;62(8):1112-9. doi: 10.1002/acr.20178.
PubMed 20235213Tillett W, Shaddick G, Korendowych E, de Vries CS, McHugh N. Joint count reliability in psoriatic arthritis observational trials--an unreported problem. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2012 Jul;51(7):1333-4. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/kes095. Epub 2012 May 4. No abstract available.
PubMed 22562935Janta I, Naredo E, Martinez-Estupinan L, Nieto JC, De la Torre I, Valor L, Estopinan L, Bello N, Hinojosa M, Gonzalez CM, Lopez-Longo J, Monteagudo I, Montoro M, Carreno L. Patient self-assessment and physician's assessment of rheumatoid arthritis activity: which is more realistic in remission status? A comparison with ultrasonography. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2013 Dec;52(12):2243-50. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/ket297. Epub 2013 Sep 17.
PubMed 24046468Barton JL, Criswell LA, Kaiser R, Chen YH, Schillinger D. Systematic review and metaanalysis of patient self-report versus trained assessor joint counts in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2009 Dec;36(12):2635-41. doi: 10.3899/jrheum.090569. Epub 2009 Nov 16.
PubMed 19918045Levy G, Cheetham C, Cheatwood A, Burchette R. Validation of patient-reported joint counts in rheumatoid arthritis and the role of training. J Rheumatol. 2007 Jun;34(6):1261-5. Epub 2007 Apr 15.
PubMed 17444590Cheung PP, Dougados M, Andre V, Balandraud N, Chales G, Chary-Valckenaere I, Dernis E, Gill G, Gilson M, Guis S, Mouterde G, Pavy S, Pouyol F, Marhadour T, Richette P, Ruyssen-Witrand A, Soubrier M, Nguyen M, Gossec L. The learning curve of nurses for the assessment of swollen and tender joints in rheumatoid arthritis. Joint Bone Spine. 2014 Mar;81(2):154-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jbspin.2013.06.006. Epub 2013 Aug 6.
PubMed 23928236Farragher TM, Lunt M, Plant D, Bunn DK, Barton A, Symmons DP. Benefit of early treatment in inflammatory polyarthritis patients with anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies versus those without antibodies. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2010 May;62(5):664-75. doi: 10.1002/acr.20207.
PubMed 20461787Pincus T, Segurado OG. Most visits of most patients with rheumatoid arthritis to most rheumatologists do not include a formal quantitative joint count. Ann Rheum Dis. 2006 Jun;65(6):820-2. doi: 10.1136/ard.2005.044230. Epub 2005 Nov 16.
PubMed 16291813Cheung PP, Gossec L, Mak A, March L. Reliability of joint count assessment in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2014 Jun;43(6):721-9. doi: 10.1016/j.semarthrit.2013.11.003. Epub 2013 Nov 13.
PubMed 24332117
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 1 Feb 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Assessment of Tender & Swollen Joints Count Score Performed by a Rheumatologist And Rheumatology Nurses in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA)
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02556034
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- APRAN / CNTO148ART4009
- Conditions
- Rheumatoid Arthritis, Psoriatic Arthritis
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 80 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Isabelle FortinUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Janssen Inc.
- Study start
- Sep 2015
- Primary completion
- 16 Nov 2018 (actual)
- Study completion
- 16 Nov 2018 (actual)
- First posted
- 22 Sep 2015 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study will establish a comparison in follow-up care of 100 patients between Health Care Practitioners, more specifically the rheumatologist and a trained nurse. The study objective is to show consistency of evaluation between two different health care professionals, a physician and a nurse.
Detailed description
This study involves one site in Canada. Patients will complete a self-evaluation of 28 joint counts for swelling (SJC) and tenderness (TJC) and assess their disease activity on a Visual Analog Scale (VAS). A 28 joint count and VAS will then be assessed by a nurse and by a rheumatologist. Clinical Disease Activity Index (CDAI) and Disease Activity Severity 28 - C Reactive protein (DAS28-CRP) will be calculated from each data set.
The same rheumatologist will examine all patients and two nurses will each randomly assess half the total enrolled patients. The nurse will be blinded to the patient's joint count and VAS, and similarly, the rheumatologist will be blinded to both the patient and nurse's assessments. The setting includes 2 nurses with different educational background: one technician and one bachelor.
The training provided to the nurses in this study allows them to master the basis of the physical exam, joint count and history of the rheumatoid patient as well as to learn the pertinent laboratory parameters. It is a 14-hour course in which the patient is examined through observation, palpation, assessment of mobility and stability and specific movement. Diagnostic tools such as the Simplified Disease Activity Index (SDAI), Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index (HAQ), CDAI and DAS-28 are included in the patient evaluation.
Each enrolled patient will receive a 5-minute training in joint assessment by the nurse. The use of the mannequin for joint assessment of swelling and tenderness will be reviewed. Objective signs of disease such as swelling, redness and heat will be explained as well as the difference between inflammation and bony swelling, the latter being indicative of osteoarthritis.
Study design
- Observational model
- Case only
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Disease evaluation | – | Other: Disease evaluation.Rheumatoid arthritis evaluations. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- The target population will be subjects with active Rheumatoid Arthritis or Psoriatic Arthritis.
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Subject is ≥18 years of age.
- Has at least one of the following diagnosis at screening
- The subject must be able to provide written informed consent and to complete the study questionnaires.
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Subject with DIP involvement in PsA
- Subject with predominant axial symptoms (spondyloarthropathy)
- Subject with fibromyalgia
- Subject involved in a concomitant study
- Subject currently takes ≥10 mg cortisone daily
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Disease evaluation.Patients will complete a self-evaluation of 28 joint counts for swelling and tenderness and assess their disease activity on a Visual Analog Scale. A 28 joint count and VAS will then be assessed by a nurse and by a rheumatologist. The same rheumatologist will examine all patients and two nurses will each randomly assess half the total enrolled patients. The nurse will be blinded to the patient's joint count and VAS, and similarly, the rheumatologist will be blinded to both the patient and nurse's assessments. | Other | Disease evaluation |
Primary outcome
Accuracy of the nurse CDAI result compared to the rheumatologist CDAI result.
Time frame: 6 months
To validate the accuracy of assessment of RA and PsA disease activity by a nurse trained in joint examination using the CDAI as compared to a rheumatologist's same assessment. The level of agreement between evaluators will be investigated using Cohen's Kappa, a statistic tool useful to the measurement of inter-rater agreement for qualitative traits.
Accuracy of the nurse DAS-28 result compared to the rheumatologist DAS-28 result.
Time frame: 6 months
To validate the accuracy of assessment of RA and PsA disease activity by a nurse trained in joint examination using the DAS-28 as compared to a rheumatologist's same assessment. The level of agreement between evaluators will be investigated using Cohen's Kappa, a statistic tool useful to the measurement of inter-rater agreement for qualitative traits.
4 secondary outcomes
Comparison of TJC results between 3 raters.
Time frame: 6 months
Comparison of SJC results between 3 raters.
Time frame: 6 months
Comparison of VAS results between 3 raters.
Time frame: 6 months
Comparison of time taken by 3 raters to perform disease assessments.
Time frame: 6 months
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 1 Feb 2019.
- Results publication: PubMed 20215140Smolen JS, Aletaha D, Bijlsma JW, Breedveld FC, Boumpas D, Burmester G, Combe B, Cutolo M, de Wit M, Dougados M, Emery P, Gibofsky A, Gomez-Reino JJ, Haraoui B, Kalden J, Keystone EC, Kvien TK, McInnes I, Martin-Mola E, Montecucco C, Schoels M, van der Heijde D; T2T Expert Committee. Treating rheumatoid arthritis to target: recommendations of an international task force. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010 Apr;69(4):631-7. doi: 10.1136/ard.2009.123919. Epub 2010 Mar 9.
- Results publication: PubMed 20237122Atar D, Birkeland KI, Uhlig T. 'Treat to target': moving targets from hypertension, hyperlipidaemia and diabetes to rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010 Apr;69(4):629-30. doi: 10.1136/ard.2010.128462. No abstract available.
- Results publication: PubMed 22473918Anderson J, Caplan L, Yazdany J, Robbins ML, Neogi T, Michaud K, Saag KG, O'Dell JR, Kazi S. Rheumatoid arthritis disease activity measures: American College of Rheumatology recommendations for use in clinical practice. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2012 May;64(5):640-7. doi: 10.1002/acr.21649.
- Results publication: PubMed 25365082Scott IC, Scott DL. Joint counts in inflammatory arthritis. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2014 Sep-Oct;32(5 Suppl 85):S-7-12. Epub 2014 Oct 30.
- Results publication: PubMed 22417647Radner H, Grisar J, Smolen JS, Stamm T, Aletaha D. Value of self-performed joint counts in rheumatoid arthritis patients near remission. Arthritis Res Ther. 2012 Mar 14;14(2):R61. doi: 10.1186/ar3777.
- Results publication: PubMed 20235213Cheung PP, Ruyssen-Witrand A, Gossec L, Paternotte S, Le Bourlout C, Mazieres M, Dougados M. Reliability of patient self-evaluation of swollen and tender joints in rheumatoid arthritis: A comparison study with ultrasonography, physician, and nurse assessments. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2010 Aug;62(8):1112-9. doi: 10.1002/acr.20178.
- Results publication: PubMed 22562935Tillett W, Shaddick G, Korendowych E, de Vries CS, McHugh N. Joint count reliability in psoriatic arthritis observational trials--an unreported problem. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2012 Jul;51(7):1333-4. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/kes095. Epub 2012 May 4. No abstract available.
- Results publication: PubMed 24046468Janta I, Naredo E, Martinez-Estupinan L, Nieto JC, De la Torre I, Valor L, Estopinan L, Bello N, Hinojosa M, Gonzalez CM, Lopez-Longo J, Monteagudo I, Montoro M, Carreno L. Patient self-assessment and physician's assessment of rheumatoid arthritis activity: which is more realistic in remission status? A comparison with ultrasonography. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2013 Dec;52(12):2243-50. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/ket297. Epub 2013 Sep 17.
- Results publication: PubMed 19918045Barton JL, Criswell LA, Kaiser R, Chen YH, Schillinger D. Systematic review and metaanalysis of patient self-report versus trained assessor joint counts in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2009 Dec;36(12):2635-41. doi: 10.3899/jrheum.090569. Epub 2009 Nov 16.
- Results publication: PubMed 17444590Levy G, Cheetham C, Cheatwood A, Burchette R. Validation of patient-reported joint counts in rheumatoid arthritis and the role of training. J Rheumatol. 2007 Jun;34(6):1261-5. Epub 2007 Apr 15.
- Results publication: PubMed 23928236Cheung PP, Dougados M, Andre V, Balandraud N, Chales G, Chary-Valckenaere I, Dernis E, Gill G, Gilson M, Guis S, Mouterde G, Pavy S, Pouyol F, Marhadour T, Richette P, Ruyssen-Witrand A, Soubrier M, Nguyen M, Gossec L. The learning curve of nurses for the assessment of swollen and tender joints in rheumatoid arthritis. Joint Bone Spine. 2014 Mar;81(2):154-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jbspin.2013.06.006. Epub 2013 Aug 6.
- Results publication: PubMed 20461787Farragher TM, Lunt M, Plant D, Bunn DK, Barton A, Symmons DP. Benefit of early treatment in inflammatory polyarthritis patients with anti-cyclic citrullinated peptide antibodies versus those without antibodies. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2010 May;62(5):664-75. doi: 10.1002/acr.20207.
Related trials for Rheumatoid Arthritis
RecruitingPhase 2
Study of PTC844 in Participants With Active Rheumatoid Arthritis
Rheumatoid Arthritis
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
An Ascending Dose Study of DKB903 in Participants With Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) and Participants With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE)
Rheumatoid Arthritis and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
R-2487 in Patients With Sjogren's Syndrome (SjD)
Sjogren's Syndrome, Sjögren
RecruitingPhase 1
A Trial in Healthy Adult Participants and Adults With Autoimmune Diseases to Test How HBM7020 is Tolerated and How it Behaves in the Body
Rheumatoid Arthritis, Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
A Study Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of Inhaled AP01 in Participants With Progressive Pulmonary Fibrosis
Pulmonary Fibrosis, Progressive Pulmonary Fibrosis
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
NABIL CHAKER, BIOLOGIST study director
CENTRE DE RHUMATOLOGIE DE L'EST DU QUEBEC
ISABELLE FORTIN, MD principal investigator
CENTRE DE RHUMATOLOGIE DE L'EST DU QUEBEC
FRÉDÉRIC BANVILLE, Ph.D principal investigator
Université de Montréal
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Rheumatoid Arthritis and Psoriatic Arthritis, run by Isabelle Fortin at 1 site in Canada.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 6 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 1 Feb 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Accuracy of the nurse CDAI result compared to the rheumatologist CDAI result. (time frame: 6 months). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02556034, which also lists 14 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 1 Feb 2019.