OF all chronic diseases, arthritis is second only to nervous and mental diseases as a cause of illness in the United States (1). It causes more years of disability than do all types of accidents and disables seven times as many persons as does cancer (2). More than 10 million persons in this country suffer from some type of rheumatic complaint, and 2?/2 nmillion of these have had to change or stop their work because of their disease (3). It is reliably estimated that 147,000 persons in the IUnited States are invalided each year from rheumatic diseases (4). While rheumatic diseases exact a high toll in morbidity, their mortality is extremely low; the reservoir of persons so afflicted is thus ever growing. In the face of the rising incidence of chronic and degenerative diseases, the socioeconomic gravity of this situation is readily apparent. Rheumatic diseases lead all others in crippling and in economic loss. They account for a loss of 97 million man-days and a quarter of a billion dollars in wages annually in the United States (1). Finally, it should be remembered that arthritis is not a disease of the aged only, but that it may affect infants and adolescents as well. The two most common and most crippling forms, rheumatoid arthritis and rheumatoid spondylitis, preponderantly affect persons in their third and fourth decades. Arthritis as a diagnosis is nonspecific; by definition it means inflammation of a joint. The types of arthritis are legion, probably numbering more than 100, and the treatment and the prognosis vary greatly among these many types. In considering rehabilitation it is important, therefore, that an etiological as well as a pathological diagnosis be established before medical, physical, or vocational measures of treament are undertaken. The majority of cases fall within 7 major categories, and 2 types, rheumatoid and degenerative joint disease, account for 70 percent of the cases (6). Ten years ago, arthritis was a disease of unknown etiologies and of dismally poor treatment prognoses. The introduction of steroid therapy in 1948 catalyzed a renaissance of interest and research that in a decade has developed more basic knowledge, better diagnostic aids, and more effective treatment measures than were developed in the preceding century. While much remains to be learned, great strides have been made. Amidst this optimism of progress has come a change in attitude toward the crippled arthritic, an attitude crystallized by favorable results attained in both physical and vocational rehabilitation studies. Because of these studies, crippled arthritics can no longer be considered negatively as candidates for rehabilitation, for with proper selection and careful treatment many can be salvaged for productive lives (5). As with all chronic diseases, the effects of arthritis ramify far beyond the physical sphere. Though the pathological affliction is primarily one of damage to intra-articular structures, the consequent disability imposes restrictions and demands adjustments in all areas of living: physical, social, economic, psychological, vocational, and recreational. In considering such a patient for rehabilitation, therefore, evaluation and treatment must be directed toward all the many facets of his condition. Proper diagDr. Lowman is clinical director of the Institute of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, New York University-Bellevue Medical Center, New York City.