Borrow it

The Resource Diagnosis of gout, investigators, Sydne J. Newberry, John FitzGerald, Margaret A. Maglione, Claire E. O'Hanlon, Dan Han, Marika Booth, Aneesa Motala, Abdul Tariq, Whitney Dudley, Roberta Shanman, Paul G. Shekelle

Diagnosis of gout, investigators, Sydne J. Newberry, John FitzGerald, Margaret A. Maglione, Claire E. O'Hanlon, Dan Han, Marika Booth, Aneesa Motala, Abdul Tariq, Whitney Dudley, Roberta Shanman, Paul G. Shekelle

Resource Information

The item Diagnosis of gout, investigators, Sydne J. Newberry, John FitzGerald, Margaret A. Maglione, Claire E. O'Hanlon, Dan Han, Marika Booth, Aneesa Motala, Abdul Tariq, Whitney Dudley, Roberta Shanman, Paul G. Shekelle represents a specific, individual, material embodiment of a distinct intellectual or artistic creation found in University of Missouri-St. Louis Libraries.
This item is available to borrow from all library branches.

Creator

Newberry, Sydne J

Author

Newberry, Sydne J

Contributor

Summary: OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review is to assess the evidence for the accuracy and safety of tests to diagnose gout in patients with no prior diagnosis of gout. The review also assesses factors that affect accuracy of diagnostic tests. Tests include algorithms that combine clinical signs and symptoms, dual-energy computed tomography (DECT), ultrasound, and plain x ray, with particular emphasis on tests that can be conducted in primary and acute (urgent and emergent) care settings. DATA SOURCES: We searched Medline(r) (from 1946), Embase(r) (from 1972), the Cochrane Library (from 1945), and the Web of Science" (from 1980) to November 7, 2014, for published studies. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the Web of Science and contacted manufacturers of imaging equipment and test kits for unpublished data on gout diagnosis. REVIEW METHODS: We reviewed published and unpublished prospective cohort, cross-sectional, and case-control studies, as well as prior systematic reviews on the accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) of diagnostic tests for gout compared with a validated reference standard in patients without a prior gout diagnosis. We also reviewed studies and prior reviews of factors affecting the accuracy of monosodium urate crystal assessment in synovial fluid. We reviewed prospective cohort, cross-sectional, and case-control studies; case reports of any size; and systematic reviews that reported adverse events associated with diagnostic tests for gout and outcomes of gout misdiagnosis. A standardized protocol with predefined criteria was used to extract details on study design, interventions, outcomes, and study quality, and to assess the strength of evidence for each conclusion. RESULTS: Six clinical algorithms comprising clinical signs and symptoms have been tested for diagnostic accuracy against the presence of monosodium urate crystals in synovial fluid aspirated from affected joints. Most studies were conducted with small groups of patients in academic rheumatology departments. Two recently developed clinical algorithms, the Diagnostic Rule, which is the only one developed and validated with primary care physicians and patients, and the Clinical Gout Diagnosis (CGD), demonstrated sensitivities of 88 percent and 97 percent, respectively, and specificities of 75 percent and 96 percent, respectively, in patients with shorter (2 years or less) and longer durations of symptoms, and they are simple to administer. However, the strength of evidence supporting their use is low, as validation of these tools remains limited. Three studies of DECT that enrolled patients without a previous gout diagnosis revealed sensitivities ranging from 85 percent to 100 percent and specificities ranging from 83 percent to 92 percent in diagnosing gout; the strength of evidence regarding the use of DECT for gout diagnosis is low. Four studies of ultrasound that enrolled patients without a previous diagnosis showed sensitivities ranging from 37 percent to 100 percent and specificities ranging from 68 percent to 97 percent, depending on the ultrasound signs assessed; the strength of evidence is low for the utility of ultrasound in diagnosing gout. A small number of studies examined factors that affected the accuracy of tests for the diagnosis of gout. The accuracy of monosodium urate analysis in synovial fluid varies widely among practitioners, but evidence on the effects of skill and experience is insufficient. No studies examined differences among practitioners in the rate of successful joint aspiration. No studies reported adverse events directly associated with techniques used to diagnose gout. However in one small study, missed gout diagnosis resulted in unnecessary surgery, longer hospital stays, and delay in appropriate treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Promising diagnostic clinical algorithms such as the Diagnostic Rule and CGD need to be validated more broadly in primary and urgent care settings. A clinical algorithm with high diagnostic accuracy ideally can form part of a diagnostic decision tree, with referral of more clinically challenging cases to rheumatologists for more invasive tests or imaging. Research is needed to assess the incremental value of synovial fluid monosodium urate crystal analysis and imaging over that of a diagnostic clinical algorithm

Language: eng

Work

Publication

Rockville, MD, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2016

Extent: 1 online resource :

Note: "February 2016."

Instance

Label: Diagnosis of gout

Title: Diagnosis of gout

Statement of responsibility: investigators, Sydne J. Newberry, John FitzGerald, Margaret A. Maglione, Claire E. O'Hanlon, Dan Han, Marika Booth, Aneesa Motala, Abdul Tariq, Whitney Dudley, Roberta Shanman, Paul G. Shekelle

Title variation: Effective Health Care Program

Creator

Newberry, Sydne J

Contributor

Author

Newberry, Sydne J

Researcher

Southern California Evidence-Based Practice Center/RAND

Sponsoring body

Effective Health Care Program (U.S.)

Subject

Genre

Review

Language: eng

Summary: OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review is to assess the evidence for the accuracy and safety of tests to diagnose gout in patients with no prior diagnosis of gout. The review also assesses factors that affect accuracy of diagnostic tests. Tests include algorithms that combine clinical signs and symptoms, dual-energy computed tomography (DECT), ultrasound, and plain x ray, with particular emphasis on tests that can be conducted in primary and acute (urgent and emergent) care settings. DATA SOURCES: We searched Medline(r) (from 1946), Embase(r) (from 1972), the Cochrane Library (from 1945), and the Web of Science" (from 1980) to November 7, 2014, for published studies. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the Web of Science and contacted manufacturers of imaging equipment and test kits for unpublished data on gout diagnosis. REVIEW METHODS: We reviewed published and unpublished prospective cohort, cross-sectional, and case-control studies, as well as prior systematic reviews on the accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) of diagnostic tests for gout compared with a validated reference standard in patients without a prior gout diagnosis. We also reviewed studies and prior reviews of factors affecting the accuracy of monosodium urate crystal assessment in synovial fluid. We reviewed prospective cohort, cross-sectional, and case-control studies; case reports of any size; and systematic reviews that reported adverse events associated with diagnostic tests for gout and outcomes of gout misdiagnosis. A standardized protocol with predefined criteria was used to extract details on study design, interventions, outcomes, and study quality, and to assess the strength of evidence for each conclusion. RESULTS: Six clinical algorithms comprising clinical signs and symptoms have been tested for diagnostic accuracy against the presence of monosodium urate crystals in synovial fluid aspirated from affected joints. Most studies were conducted with small groups of patients in academic rheumatology departments. Two recently developed clinical algorithms, the Diagnostic Rule, which is the only one developed and validated with primary care physicians and patients, and the Clinical Gout Diagnosis (CGD), demonstrated sensitivities of 88 percent and 97 percent, respectively, and specificities of 75 percent and 96 percent, respectively, in patients with shorter (2 years or less) and longer durations of symptoms, and they are simple to administer. However, the strength of evidence supporting their use is low, as validation of these tools remains limited. Three studies of DECT that enrolled patients without a previous gout diagnosis revealed sensitivities ranging from 85 percent to 100 percent and specificities ranging from 83 percent to 92 percent in diagnosing gout; the strength of evidence regarding the use of DECT for gout diagnosis is low. Four studies of ultrasound that enrolled patients without a previous diagnosis showed sensitivities ranging from 37 percent to 100 percent and specificities ranging from 68 percent to 97 percent, depending on the ultrasound signs assessed; the strength of evidence is low for the utility of ultrasound in diagnosing gout. A small number of studies examined factors that affected the accuracy of tests for the diagnosis of gout. The accuracy of monosodium urate analysis in synovial fluid varies widely among practitioners, but evidence on the effects of skill and experience is insufficient. No studies examined differences among practitioners in the rate of successful joint aspiration. No studies reported adverse events directly associated with techniques used to diagnose gout. However in one small study, missed gout diagnosis resulted in unnecessary surgery, longer hospital stays, and delay in appropriate treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Promising diagnostic clinical algorithms such as the Diagnostic Rule and CGD need to be validated more broadly in primary and urgent care settings. A clinical algorithm with high diagnostic accuracy ideally can form part of a diagnostic decision tree, with referral of more clinically challenging cases to rheumatologists for more invasive tests or imaging. Research is needed to assess the incremental value of synovial fluid monosodium urate crystal analysis and imaging over that of a diagnostic clinical algorithm

Member of

Cataloging source: NLM

http://bibfra.me/vocab/relation/commissioningbody: SGEpYsXqBGk

http://library.link/vocab/creatorName: Newberry, Sydne J

Funding information: Prepared for: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857; www.ahrq.gov. Contract No. 290-2012-00006-I. Prepared by: Southern California Evidence-based Practice Center, Santa Monica, CA

Government publication: federal national government publication

Index: no index present

Literary form: non fiction

Nature of contents

dictionaries
surveys of literature

NLM call number: WE 350

http://library.link/vocab/relatedWorkOrContributorName

United States
Southern California Evidence-Based Practice Center/RAND
Effective Health Care Program (U.S.)

Series statement

Comparative effectiveness review
AHRQ publication

Series volume

number 158
No. 15(16)-EHC026-EF

http://library.link/vocab/subjectName

Gout
Comparative Effectiveness Research
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Sensitivity and Specificity

Label: Diagnosis of gout, investigators, Sydne J. Newberry, John FitzGerald, Margaret A. Maglione, Claire E. O'Hanlon, Dan Han, Marika Booth, Aneesa Motala, Abdul Tariq, Whitney Dudley, Roberta Shanman, Paul G. Shekelle

Instantiates

Diagnosis of gout

Publication

Rockville, MD, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2016

Note: "February 2016."

Bibliography note: Includes bibliographical references

Carrier category: online resource

Carrier category code: cr

Carrier MARC source: rdacarrier

Content category

text
still image

Content type code

Content type MARC source

rdacontent
rdacontent

Control code: 952657033

Extent: 1 online resource :

Form of item: online

Media category: computer

Media MARC source: rdamedia

Media type code: c

Specific material designation: remote

System control number: (OCoLC)952657033

Label: Diagnosis of gout, investigators, Sydne J. Newberry, John FitzGerald, Margaret A. Maglione, Claire E. O'Hanlon, Dan Han, Marika Booth, Aneesa Motala, Abdul Tariq, Whitney Dudley, Roberta Shanman, Paul G. Shekelle

Publication

Rockville, MD, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2016

Note: "February 2016."

Bibliography note: Includes bibliographical references

Carrier category: online resource

Carrier category code: cr

Carrier MARC source: rdacarrier

Content category

text
still image

Content type code

Content type MARC source

rdacontent
rdacontent

Control code: 952657033

Extent: 1 online resource :

Form of item: online

Media category: computer

Media MARC source: rdamedia

Media type code: c

Specific material designation: remote

System control number: (OCoLC)952657033

St. Louis Mercantile LibraryBorrow it

1 University Blvd, St. Louis, MO, 63121, US

38.710138 -90.311107
Thomas Jefferson LibraryBorrow it

1 University Blvd, St. Louis, MO, 63121, US

38.710138 -90.311107
University ArchivesBorrow it

703 Lewis Hall, Columbia, MO, 65211, US
University of Missouri-St. Louis Libraries DepositoryBorrow it

2908 Lemone Blvd, Columbia, MO, 65201, US

38.919360 -92.291620
University of Missouri-St. Louis Libraries DepositoryBorrow it

2908 Lemone Blvd, Columbia, MO, 65201, US

38.919360 -92.291620
Ward E Barnes Education LibraryBorrow it

8001 Natural Bridge Rd, St. Louis, MO, 63121, US

38.707079 -90.311355

Subject

Genre

Member of

Library Locations