Gaps between research and recommendations in rheumatoid arthritis

Abstract

Objectives: To identify recommendations on the diagnosis and management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) supported by low recommendation grades, to study the causes of this low grading, and to propose solutions.

Methods: A group of six rheumatologists, with extensive experience in the development of systematic reviews, reviewed national and international RA recommendations and practice guidelines. They identified all recommendations with a low level of evidence or recommendation grade (levels equivalent to 4, 5, or grades C or D of the Oxford Levels of Evidence), classified them by areas (diagnosis, follow-up, treatment, others), and analyzed plausible causes of low graduation. A Delphi was used to select 10 recommendations where it was most important to obtain quality evidence to support them. Subsequently, actions were proposed to improve evidence and recommendation grading.

Results: Fourteen documents were analyzed, in which 192 recommendations with low evidence/grade of recommendation were identified, most of which were on treatment. The two most frequent causes of this low level are the absence of studies and the discrepancy between the wording of the recommendation and the evidence used. Finally, the proposed solution to the critical recommendations is a list of unanswered research questions and possible designs to answer them.

Conclusions: We propose to design and promote research that truly supports or rectifies clinical practice and, thus, bridges the gap between existing evidence and critical recommendations.

Keywords: Clinical practice guidelines; Level of evidence; Recommendations; Rheumatoid arthritis; Systematic review.