Video: Every Case Tells a Story| Webinar: ACR/CHEST ILD Guidelines in Practice

An official publication of the ACR and the ARP serving rheumatologists and rheumatology professionals

  • Conditions
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout and Crystalline Arthritis
    • Myositis
    • Osteoarthritis and Bone Disorders
    • Pain Syndromes
    • Pediatric Conditions
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Sjögren’s Disease
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
    • Systemic Sclerosis
    • Vasculitis
    • Other Rheumatic Conditions
  • FocusRheum
    • ANCA-Associated Vasculitis
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
  • Guidance
    • Clinical Criteria/Guidelines
    • Ethics
    • Legal Updates
    • Legislation & Advocacy
    • Meeting Reports
      • ACR Convergence
      • Other ACR meetings
      • EULAR/Other
    • Research Rheum
  • Drug Updates
    • Analgesics
    • Biologics/DMARDs
  • Practice Support
    • Billing/Coding
    • EMRs
    • Facility
    • Insurance
    • QA/QI
    • Technology
    • Workforce
  • Opinion
    • Patient Perspective
    • Profiles
    • Rheuminations
      • Video
    • Speak Out Rheum
  • Career
    • ACR ExamRheum
    • Awards
    • Career Development
  • ACR
    • ACR Home
    • ACR Convergence
    • ACR Guidelines
    • Journals
      • ACR Open Rheumatology
      • Arthritis & Rheumatology
      • Arthritis Care & Research
    • From the College
    • Events/CME
    • President’s Perspective
  • Search

If the Best You Can Do Is Zero

David S. Pisetsky, MD, PhD  |  Issue: March 2008  |  March 1, 2008

If a physician or other provider wants to know what a patient has lost (i.e., cannot do), the HAQ is terrific. Consider its construction and the manner in which points are awarded to the extent of limitation. For any given activity (e.g., opening a jar), full function gets a zero while full dysfunction gets 3 points. The best a person can do in life is a zero. The worst is 3. While I would have preferred a scaling system that gives function a positive number and dysfunction a negative one, the HAQ is enormously valuable and is one of bedrocks of modern rheumatology research.

While I occasionally do a HAQ in my clinic, usually I ask the patient a more direct question about function, especially if I am with a trainee: “What are things that you would like to do but cannot do because of your arthritis?” The array of answers is remarkable for its variety (and sadness) and, hopefully, impresses on the trainee the seriousness of arthritis and the need for better treatment. After 30 years of caring for arthritis patients, I am well aware of the monumental loss this disease causes.

ad goes here:advert-1
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE
Leon Fleisher
Leon Fleisher

The Goal: Less Loss

There are many reasons for providers and investigators to focus on loss and demonstrate its magnitude in quantitative ways. For the individual patient, a measure like the HAQ is an important way to characterize health status and measure outcomes. A change in the HAQ is often as good an indicator as a change in the joint count or sedimentation rate.

In a larger realm of health policy, a quantitative measure of loss provides a basis for advocating for patients to get more and better care and a greater share of the healthcare dollar. The greater the loss caused by a given type of illness, the greater the allocation of resources—whether by the NIH for research or the insurers for the provision of services. Certainly, the pharmaceutical industry is attuned to the burden of illness—as reflected in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)—and it is likely to invest in diseases where the unmet needs are high.

ad goes here:advert-2
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

Whether the patient fills in a questionnaire like the HAQ or answers an open-ended question about function, the message is clear: Arthritis is about loss. Fortunately, medical therapy for inflammatory arthritis and improved surgical procedures are producing dramatic improvement in patient outcome, but the benchmark of success is really less loss, with gain only moving the HAQ back to zero.

Page: 1 2 3 | Single Page
Share: 

Filed under:OpinionRheuminationsSpeak Out Rheum Tagged with:ArthritisDiagnostic CriteriaHealth Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ)rheumatologist

Related Articles

    Strength from Weakness

    April 1, 2008

    Perhaps physicians should look at the doors disability opens, too

    The Rheumatologist as Detective

    February 1, 2015

    A case of difficult-to-diagnose Whipple’s disease

    Oksana Shufrych TKTK / Shutterstock.com

    Heated Gloves May Improve Hand Function in Diffuse Systemic Sclerosis

    October 16, 2017

    Systemic sclerosis (SSc), a subtype of scleroderma, is a rare, complex autoimmune disease characterized by widespread vasculopathy of the small arteries and fibroblast dysfunction.1,2 It has been described as a fibrosing micro­vascular disease, because vascular injury precedes and leads to tissue fibrosis.3 The resulting Raynaud’s phenomenon, pain, skin thickening and tightening, and multi-organ involvement have…

    The Science of MDHAQ/RAPID3 Scores

    December 12, 2011

    Do patient self-reports provide valid data for evidence-based care in rheumatology practice?

  • About Us
  • Meet the Editors
  • Issue Archives
  • Contribute
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us
  • Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1931-3268 (print). ISSN 1931-3209 (online).
  • DEI Statement
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookie Preferences