Connect
MJA
MJA

Rethinking the discordance between guidelines and practice in rheumatoid arthritis treatment

Shafqat Inam, Wendy L Lipworth, Ian H Kerridge and Richard O Day
Med J Aust 2011; 195 (8) || doi: 10.5694/mja11.10068
Published online: 17 October 2011

A failure of practice, or a failure of evidence?

Drug treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has evolved significantly in recent decades, owing to increasing evidence supporting early intervention with disease-modifying therapies and the advent of novel biological therapies that specifically target the immunological and cellular mediators of disease.

The full article is accessible to AMA
members and paid subscribers.
Login to MJA or subscribe now.


  • 1 Department of Medicine, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, NSW.
  • 2 Australian Institute of Health Innovation, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW.
  • 3 Centre for Values, Ethics and Law in Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW.
  • 4 University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW.
  • 5 Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, St Vincent’s Hospital, Sydney, NSW.


Correspondence: shafqat.inam@gmail.com

Competing interests:

No relevant disclosures.

  • 1. Donahue KE, Gartlehner G, Jonas DE, et al. Systematic review: comparative effectiveness and harms of disease-modifying medications for rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Intern Med 2008; 148: 124-134.
  • 2. Gartlehner G, Hansen RA, Jonas BL, et al. The comparative efficacy and safety of biologics for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and metaanalysis. J Rheumatol 2006; 33: 2398-2408.
  • 3. Royal Australian College of General Practitioners. Clinical guideline for the diagnosis and management of early rheumatoid arthritis. Melbourne: RACGP, 2009.
  • 4. Kay J, Westhovens R. Methotrexate: the gold standard without standardisation. Ann Rheum Dis 2009; 68: 1081-1082.
  • 5. Siegel J. Comparative effectiveness of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Intern Med 2008; 148: 162-163.
  • 6. Zink A, Askling J, Dixon WG, et al. European biologicals registers: methodology, selected results and perspectives. Ann Rheum Dis 2009; 68: 1240-1246.
  • 7. Kalden JR, Antoni C, Alvaro-Gracia JM, et al. Use of combination of leflunomide with biological agents in treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 2005; 32: 1620-1631.
  • 8. Benhamou M, Rincheval N, Roy C, et al. The gap between practice and guidelines in the choice of first-line disease modifying antirheumatic drug in early rheumatoid arthritis: results from the ESPOIR cohort. J Rheumatol 2009; 36: 934-942.
  • 9. Lacaille D, Anis AH, Guh DP, Esdaile JM. Gaps in care for rheumatoid arthritis: a population study. Arthritis Rheum 2005; 53: 241-248.
  • 10. Grol R. Has guideline development gone astray? Yes. BMJ 2010; 340: c306.
  • 11. Cabana MD, Rand CS, Powe NR, et al. Why don’t physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement. JAMA 1999; 282: 1458-1465.
  • 12. Boers M. Cost-effectiveness of biologics as first-line treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: case closed? Ann Intern Med 2009; 151: 668-669.
  • 13. Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. The national strategy for quality use of medicines. Plain English edition. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2002. http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/content/nmp-pdf-natstrateng-cnt.htm

Author

remove_circle_outline Delete Author
add_circle_outline Add Author

Comment
Do you have any competing interests to declare? *

I/we agree to assign copyright to the Medical Journal of Australia and agree to the Conditions of publication *
I/we agree to the Terms of use of the Medical Journal of Australia *
Email me when people comment on this article

Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.