A 10-year study of the management of rheumatoid arthritis was conducted to compare a programme consisting of rest and anti-inflammatory and antirheumatic drugs with one consisting of maintenance of activity, anti-inflammatory and antirheumatic drugs, and systemic steroids where necessary. During this period subjects who did not respond to the treatment allocated went on to a combined treatment programme of rest, anti-inflammatory and antirheumatic drugs, and steroids. Among those who remained in the trial for the 10 years, there was little difference between the two groups in morning stiffness, number of inflamed joints, functional capacity, grip strength, number of American Rheumatism Association criteria present, and whether they remained on their original treatment programme or switched to the combined programme. However, in those who started in the steroid group, the condition of several joints tended to be better clinically and radiologically than in those of the other group during and at the end of 10 years of the original treatment programme, at time of transfer to the combined programme, and at the completion of the combined programme. Both groups had as many complications of disease and treatment, and adverse effects attributable to steroids seemed to be restricted to those with severe disease who had not responded to their original programme. A policy of maintaining physical activity plus the judicious use of steroids where required produces, in the long term, results as good as or probably better than a regimen of bed rest and no steroids.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help

• DOI
• PubMed
• PDF locator
• publisher