M

Melanie Brown

Otago Polytechnic

ORCID: 0000-0002-2057-4496

Publishes on Osteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms, Interprofessional Education and Collaboration, Rheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies. 41 papers and 2.6k citations.

41Publications
2.6kTotal Citations

Is this you? Claim your profile.

Add your photo, update your bio, and get notified when your ranking changes.

Top publicationsby citations

2015 Gout classification criteria: an American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative
Tuhina Neogi, Tim Jansen, Nicola Dalbeth et al.|Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases|2015
Cited by 892Open Access

OBJECTIVE: Existing criteria for the classification of gout have suboptimal sensitivity and/or specificity, and were developed at a time when advanced imaging was not available. The current effort was undertaken to develop new classification criteria for gout. METHODS: An international group of investigators, supported by the American College of Rheumatology and the European League Against Rheumatism, conducted a systematic review of the literature on advanced imaging of gout, a diagnostic study in which the presence of monosodium urate monohydrate (MSU) crystals in synovial fluid or tophus was the gold standard, a ranking exercise of paper patient cases, and a multi-criterion decision analysis exercise. These data formed the basis for developing the classification criteria, which were tested in an independent data set. RESULTS: The entry criterion for the new classification criteria requires the occurrence of at least one episode of peripheral joint or bursal swelling, pain, or tenderness. The presence of MSU crystals in a symptomatic joint/bursa (ie, synovial fluid) or in a tophus is a sufficient criterion for classification of the subject as having gout, and does not require further scoring. The domains of the new classification criteria include clinical (pattern of joint/bursa involvement, characteristics and time course of symptomatic episodes), laboratory (serum urate, MSU-negative synovial fluid aspirate), and imaging (double-contour sign on ultrasound or urate on dual-energy CT, radiographic gout-related erosion). The sensitivity and specificity of the criteria are high (92% and 89%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The new classification criteria, developed using a data-driven and decision-analytic approach, have excellent performance characteristics and incorporate current state-of-the-art evidence regarding gout.

2015 Gout Classification Criteria: An American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism Collaborative Initiative
Tuhina Neogi, Tim Jansen, Nicola Dalbeth et al.|Arthritis & Rheumatology|2015
Cited by 637Open Access

OBJECTIVE: Existing criteria for the classification of gout have suboptimal sensitivity and/or specificity, and were developed at a time when advanced imaging was not available. The current effort was undertaken to develop new classification criteria for gout. METHODS: An international group of investigators, supported by the American College of Rheumatology and the European League Against Rheumatism, conducted a systematic review of the literature on advanced imaging of gout, a diagnostic study in which the presence of monosodium urate monohydrate (MSU) crystals in synovial fluid or tophus was the gold standard, a ranking exercise of paper patient cases, and a multicriterion decision analysis exercise. These data formed the basis for developing the classification criteria, which were tested in an independent data set. RESULTS: The entry criterion for the new classification criteria requires the occurrence of at least 1 episode of peripheral joint or bursal swelling, pain, or tenderness. The presence of MSU crystals in a symptomatic joint/bursa (i.e., synovial fluid) or in a tophus is a sufficient criterion for classification of the subject as having gout, and does not require further scoring. The domains of the new classification criteria include clinical (pattern of joint/bursa involvement, characteristics and time course of symptomatic episodes), laboratory (serum urate, MSU-negative synovial fluid aspirate), and imaging (double-contour sign on ultrasound or urate on dual-energy computed tomography, radiographic gout-related erosion). The sensitivity and specificity of the criteria are high (92% and 89%, respectively). CONCLUSION: The new classification criteria, developed using a data-driven and decision analytic approach, have excellent performance characteristics and incorporate current state-of-the-art evidence regarding gout.

Study for Updated Gout Classification Criteria: Identification of Features to Classify Gout
William J. Taylor, Jaap Fransen, Tim Jansen et al.|Arthritis Care & Research|2015
Cited by 173Open Access

OBJECTIVE: To determine which clinical, laboratory, and imaging features most accurately distinguished gout from non-gout. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of consecutive rheumatology clinic patients with ≥1 swollen joint or subcutaneous tophus. Gout was defined by synovial fluid or tophus aspirate microscopy by certified examiners in all patients. The sample was randomly divided into a model development (two-thirds) and test sample (one-third). Univariate and multivariate association between clinical features and monosodium urate-defined gout was determined using logistic regression modeling. Shrinkage of regression weights was performed to prevent overfitting of the final model. Latent class analysis was conducted to identify patterns of joint involvement. RESULTS: In total, 983 patients were included. Gout was present in 509 (52%). In the development sample (n = 653), the following features were selected for the final model: joint erythema (multivariate odds ratio [OR] 2.13), difficulty walking (multivariate OR 7.34), time to maximal pain <24 hours (multivariate OR 1.32), resolution by 2 weeks (multivariate OR 3.58), tophus (multivariate OR 7.29), first metatarsophalangeal (MTP1) joint ever involved (multivariate OR 2.30), location of currently tender joints in other foot/ankle (multivariate OR 2.28) or MTP1 joint (multivariate OR 2.82), serum urate level >6 mg/dl (0.36 mmoles/liter; multivariate OR 3.35), ultrasound double contour sign (multivariate OR 7.23), and radiograph erosion or cyst (multivariate OR 2.49). The final model performed adequately in the test set, with no evidence of misfit, high discrimination, and predictive ability. MTP1 joint involvement was the most common joint pattern (39.4%) in gout cases. CONCLUSION: Ten key discriminating features have been identified for further evaluation for new gout classification criteria. Ultrasound findings and degree of uricemia add discriminating value, and will significantly contribute to more accurate classification criteria.

Living with osteoarthritis is a balancing act: an exploration of patients’ beliefs about knee pain
Ben Darlow, Melanie Brown, Bronwyn Lennox Thompson et al.|BMC Rheumatology|2018
Cited by 125Open Access

This study aimed to explore the beliefs of people with knee osteoarthritis (OA) about the disease, and how these beliefs had formed and what impact these beliefs had on activity participation, health behaviour, and self-management. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 people with knee OA recruited from general practices, community physiotherapy clinics, and public advertisements in two provinces of New Zealand. Data were analysed using Interpretive Description. Two key themes emerged. 1) Knowledge: certainty and uncertainty described participants’ strong beliefs about anatomical changes in their knee. Participants’ beliefs in a biomechanical model of progressive joint degradation often appeared to originate within clinical encounters and from literal interpretation of the term ‘wear and tear’. These beliefs led to uncertainty regarding interpretation of daily symptoms and participants’ ability to influence the rate of decline and certainty that joint replacement surgery represented the only effective solution to fix the damaged knee. 2) Living with OA described broader perspectives of living with OA and the perceived need to balance competing values and risks when making decisions about activity participation, medication, attentional focus, accessing care, and making the most of today without sabotaging tomorrow. Misunderstandings about knee OA negatively impacted on activity participation, health behaviours, and self-management decisions. Biomechanical models of OA reduced participant exploration of management options and underpinned a perceived need to balance competing values. Improved information provision to people with knee OA could help guide positive health behaviour and self-management decisions and ensure these decisions are grounded in current evidence.