A84: Changes over Time in Symptoms and Treatment of Juvenile Primary Fibromyalgia Syndrome

• Published in: Arthritis & rheumatology (Hoboken, N.J.) N.J.), 2014-03, Vol.66 (S3), p.S117-S117
• Main Authors: Connelly, Mark, Hoffart, Cara, Schikler, Kenneth, Boneparth, Alexis, Weiss, Jennifer E.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• ISSN: 2326-5191; 2326-5205
• DOI: 10.1002/art.38500

Background/Purpose: There are limited data describing longitudinal trends of symptoms and outcomes among children seeking treatment for Juvenile Primary Fibromyalgia Syndrome (JPFS). Pediatric rheumatologists often are the first point of subspecialty contact for children and adolescents with JPFS and typically evaluate the outcome of their initial treatment recommendations over one or more follow‐up visits. Using baseline and follow‐up data entered into the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) registry for patients with JPFS, we sought to determine the extent to which symptoms, function, and treatment recommendations change over time in this patient population. Methods: Deidentified information on symptoms, treatments, and function (CHAQ scores, subjective well‐being numerical rating scale, and 5‐point HRQOL rating scale) were extracted from the CARRA registry for all baseline and follow‐up entries between May 2010 and September 2013. Data were analyzed for 66 patients (38% of the baseline cohort) having at least one follow‐up visit recorded in the registry; the follow‐up period ranged from 0.25 to 2.5 years from baseline (M = .88 years +/− .51 years). The analyzed cohort was 82% female and ranged in age (at baseline) from 9–21 years (M = 15.0 +/− 2.28 years). Multilevel growth models were used to determine time‐related trends in symptoms, function, and treatments since completion of baseline evaluation; logistic growth models were used for models with binary outcome variables. Results: Pain scores were in the moderate to severe range at baseline (M = 6.00/10, SD = 2.74) and significantly worsened over time (b = .43 ± .19, t(91) = 2.17, p = .03). Similarly, indicators of function and well‐being either worsened over time (for CHAQ: b = .10 ± .05, t(111) = 2.05, p = .04; for subjective well‐being: b = .67 ± .21, t(91) = 3.28, p