Evaluation of the Diagnostic Performance of American College of Rheumatology, EULAR, and National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence Criteria Against Clinically Relevant Knee Osteoarthritis: Data From the CHECK Cohort

Abstract

ObjectiveOur objective was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the EULAR, American College of Rheumatology (ACR), and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) criteria by using clinical experts’ diagnosis of clinically relevant knee osteoarthritis (OA) as the outcome of interest.MethodsIn a previous study, we recruited clinical experts to evaluate longitudinal (5‐, 8‐, and 10‐year follow‐up) clinical and radiographic data of symptomatic knees from the Cohort Hip and Cohort Knee (CHECK) study for the presence or absence of clinically relevant OA. In the current study, ACR, EULAR, and NICE criteria were applied to the same 5‐, 8‐, and 10‐year follow‐up data; then a knee was diagnosed with OA if fulfilling the criteria at one of the three time points (F1), two of the time points (F2), or at all three time points (F3). Using clinically relevant OA as the reference standard, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for the three criteria were assessed.ResultsA total of 539 participants for a total of 833 examined knees were included. Thirty‐six percent of knees were diagnosed with clinically relevant OA by experts. Sixty‐seven percent to 74% of the knees received the same diagnosis (OA or non‐OA) by the three criteria sets for the different definitions (F1 to F3). EULAR consistently (F1 through F3) had the highest specificity, and NICE consistently had the highest sensitivity.ConclusionThe diagnoses only moderately overlapped among the three criteria sets. The EULAR criteria seemed to be more suitable for study enrollment (when aimed at recruiting clinically relevant OA knees), given the highest specificities. The NICE criteria, given the highest sensitivities, could be more useful for an initial diagnosis in clinical practice.