The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
| Title |
Prevalence, impact and care of foot problems in people with rheumatoid arthritis: results from a United Kingdom based cross‐sectional survey
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13047-017-0229-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Oonagh Wilson, Sarah Hewlett, James Woodburn, Jon Pollock, John Kirwan |
| Abstract |
Foot symptoms in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) derive from a combination of inflammation, altered foot mechanics, deformity and secondary skin lesions. Guidelines recommend regular review of patients' feet, but the extent to which the general population of RA patients report foot symptoms and access foot care has not been established. The aims of this study were to determine the prevalence, impact and care of foot problems in all patients with RA in one geographical area and identify factors associated with accessing foot care. Cross-sectional survey of a random sample of patients with RA, who resided within a single community-based National Health Service (NHS) podiatry service. The questionnaire collected demographic data (age, gender, local deprivation score), clinical data (disease duration, arthritis medications, disability (Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ)), current foot problems, foot care accessed (podiatry, orthotics and/or orthopaedics) and care received, measures of impact (Foot Impact Scale) and ability to work. Of 1003 total eligible patients in the target population, 739 were posted survey packs. Of these 413 (56%) replied. Responders and non-responders had similar age (63.5 yr. vs.61.5 yr), gender (74.1%F vs. 75.2%F), and highest deprivation category (13.3% vs.15.9%). Of the responders 92.1% reported current foot problems: articular 73.8%, cutaneous lesions 65.4%, structural 57.6%, extra-articular 42.6%. Responders' median (IQR) disease duration 10 (5-20) years, HAQ 1.5 (0.75-2.0), FISIF 10 (6-14) and FISAP 16 (7-23) and 37.8% reported impacts on work. While 69.5% had accessed foot care there were differences in the route of access (by gender and whether independent or NHS provision) and were older (64.9 yr. vs 60.4 yr. p = 0.001), had longer disease duration (12 yr. vs 7 yr. p < 0.001) and had a greater proportion of females (72.2% vs 61.7% p = 0.04) than those who had not accessed care. Current foot problems were reported by 92.1% of the study sample and substantially impacted on life and work. While overall access to foot care was higher than anticipated, routes of access differed and extent of current problems suggests the provision of effective, timely and targeted care is a pressing need. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 28% |
| Australia | 2 | 11% |
| United States | 1 | 6% |
| Spain | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 9 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 44% |
| Scientists | 6 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 85 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 14% |
| Researcher | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 13% |
| Unknown | 31 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 20% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 2% |
| Engineering | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 39 | 46% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 November 2017.
All research outputs
#3,426,873
of 25,988,468 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Foot and Ankle Research
#75
of 313 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,998
of 342,667 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Foot and Ankle Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,988,468 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 313 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 342,667 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them