Evidence Hub

Mortality, disability, and healthcare expenditure of patients with seropositive rheumatoid arthritis in Korea: A nationwide population-based study

I. Choi, J. Lee, Y. Song, E. Y. Lee

PLoS ONE, 2019

1,655 participants · 32 citations

Abstract

Background We investigated the mortality and disability rate, as well as the healthcare expenditure, for patients with newly diagnosed seropositive rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who were followed-up for up to 10 years, compared to the general population in Korea. Methods We conducted a nationwide population-based study using a National Health Insurance Service-National Sample Cohort of the Korean population, consisting of 1 million individuals who submitted medical care claims between 2002 and 2013. RA was identified using as the International Classification of Diseases code M05 (seropositive RA), with prescription of any disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD). Our analysis was based on the data of 1655 patients with incident seropositive RA and 8275 non-RA controls. The controls were matched to the RA cohort by sex, age at the time of diagnosis, duration of follow-up, geographic region, type of social security, and household income. Results The most commonly used conventional synthetic DMARDs were hydroxychloroquine (71.30%) and methotrexate (69.5%), with adalimumab being the most commonly used biologic DMARD (2.54%). The mortality rate was significantly higher in the RA than the control group (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.29, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02–1.64) in the first 10 years after diagnosis. Specifically, mortality due to infectious diseases (IRR 4.41, 95% CI 1.60–12.17) and pneumonia (IRR 3.92, 95% CI 1.46–10.53) was significantly higher in the RA than…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 1,655 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free