Objectives To compare various methods of estimation of AS activity in real practice of rheumatologist’s in Russia.
Methods Rheumatologist’s from 24 centers of Russia evaluated 330 patients with AS, who visited to their practice during 4 months. The diagnosis was verified by the MNY criteria (1984). X-ray changes of sacroiliac joint were evaluated by two independent experts by blind method. Activity of disease was defined by BASDAI, ASDAS (ESR), physician’s global assessment and ESR.
Results 46% patients have high activity by physician’s global assessment, 61% patients - by BASDAI (mean 4,8±2,1); 88% have high and very high activity by ASDAS (ESR) (mean 3,4±1,1); average value of ESR was 33,8±29 mm/h.
Russian rheumatologists are guided in clinical practice at an estimation of the disease activity of AS, first of all, on inflammatory markers. Strong correlation has been found between ASDAS and an ESR (r=0,74, by Pirson’s method), unlike BASDAI and an ESR (r=0,27); ASDAS was better correlated with physician’s global assessment disease activity in comparison with BASDAI (r=0,4). However, number of patients with high activity of AS by BASDAI and ASDAS is rather more. There were the big difference between BASDAI and ASDAS at estimation of high stage of disease activity of AS.
Conclusions So, we didn’t find any preferences at an estimation of disease activity of AS neither by BASDAI nor by ASDAS. It is possible to use for definition of disease activity both of these indexes in clinical practice, and it is more preferable to use ASDAS for the scientific purpose.
Disclosure of Interest None Declared
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.