EVALUATION STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Performance of Fibromyalgia Rapid Screening Tool (FiRST) to detect fibromyalgia syndrome in rheumatic diseases.
Rheumatology 2016 October
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of the Fibromyalgia Rapid Screening Tool (FiRST) self-questionnaire for the detection of FM associated with inflammatory rheumatic diseases.
METHODS: This cross-sectional, French single-centre study was carried out between September 2014 and April 2015 in all patients who consulted for RA, SpA or CTD. Diagnosis of FM was based on ACR 90 criteria and rheumatologist opinion.
RESULTS: The self-questionnaire was completed by 605 patients (279 RA, 271 SpA, 57 CTD). It detected 143 concomitant FMs (24.4%). When assessed against ACR 90 criteria, FiRST had a sensitivity of 74.5%, a specificity of 80.4%, a positive predictive value of 26.6% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 97.1%. Specificity was lower in the CTD group (RA: 84.4%, SpA: 80.2%, CTD: 59.6%) (P = 0.001). When assessed against the rheumatologist's opinion, FiRST had a sensitivity of 75.8%, a specificity of 85.1%, a positive predictive value of 48.3% and an NPV of 95%. Sensitivity was lower in the SpA group than in the CTD group (66% vs 94.4%) (P = 0.004). Performance varied according to self-questionnaire items.
CONCLUSION: Although it performs less well in inflammatory rheumatic disease, FiRST's opinion is close to that of the rheumatologist. It can be used by the rheumatologist in clinical practice for patients facing an apparent treatment failure and to rule out a potential FM diagnosis which could interfere with the treatment response.
METHODS: This cross-sectional, French single-centre study was carried out between September 2014 and April 2015 in all patients who consulted for RA, SpA or CTD. Diagnosis of FM was based on ACR 90 criteria and rheumatologist opinion.
RESULTS: The self-questionnaire was completed by 605 patients (279 RA, 271 SpA, 57 CTD). It detected 143 concomitant FMs (24.4%). When assessed against ACR 90 criteria, FiRST had a sensitivity of 74.5%, a specificity of 80.4%, a positive predictive value of 26.6% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 97.1%. Specificity was lower in the CTD group (RA: 84.4%, SpA: 80.2%, CTD: 59.6%) (P = 0.001). When assessed against the rheumatologist's opinion, FiRST had a sensitivity of 75.8%, a specificity of 85.1%, a positive predictive value of 48.3% and an NPV of 95%. Sensitivity was lower in the SpA group than in the CTD group (66% vs 94.4%) (P = 0.004). Performance varied according to self-questionnaire items.
CONCLUSION: Although it performs less well in inflammatory rheumatic disease, FiRST's opinion is close to that of the rheumatologist. It can be used by the rheumatologist in clinical practice for patients facing an apparent treatment failure and to rule out a potential FM diagnosis which could interfere with the treatment response.
Full text links
Trending Papers
Evidence-Based Guideline for the diagnosis and management of eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis.Nature Reviews. Rheumatology 2023 May 10
A Systematic Approach to Understanding Acid-Base Disorders in the Critically Ill.Annals of Pharmacotherapy 2023 April 27
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
Read by QxMD is copyright © 2021 QxMD Software Inc. All rights reserved. By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app