Table 3: Efficacy
of the survey approach to distinguishing entheseal
reaction disease specificity.
Status |
Age |
San
Francisco |
Mases |
Berlin |
SPARCC‡ |
Impact |
Leed |
Major |
Mander |
Rheumatoid |
57.18 |
1.53 |
0.24 |
1.88 |
4.94 |
1.35 |
1.24 |
2.88 |
7.41 |
Spondyloarthropathy |
58.12 |
1.53 |
0.24 |
1.88 |
4.82 |
1.38 |
1.24 |
3.59 |
11.35 |
CPPD |
59.38 |
1.57 |
0.48 |
1.96 |
5.43 |
1.29 |
1.48 |
3.57 |
13.00 |
DISH |
64.25 |
1.50 |
0.13 |
1.75 |
4.19 |
1.38 |
1.25 |
3.06 |
10.31 |
Healthy* |
61.06 |
1.50 |
0.13 |
1.75 |
3.63 |
1.38 |
1.25 |
2.50 |
5.75 |
ANOVA |
NS† |
NS |
NS |
NS |
NS |
NS |
NS |
NS |
P = 0.068 |
RA+healthy vs. others |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P = 0.038 |
*Absence of disorders in which enthesial reaction is suspected, including hypertrophic osteoarthropathy, renal disease, syphilis; †Not significant;
‡Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada Enthesitis Index.