The Journal of rheumatology · 2009
The localized scleroderma skin severity index and physician global assessment of disease activity: a work in progress toward development of localized scleroderma outcome measures.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Arkachaisri Thaschawee, Vilaiyuk Soamarat, Li Suzanne, O'Neil Kathleen M, Pope Elena, Higgins Gloria C, Punaro Marilynn, Rabinovich Egla C, Rosenkranz Margalit, Kietz Daniel A, Rosen Paul, Spalding Steven J, Hennon Teresa R, Torok Kathryn S, Cassidy Elaine, Medsger Thomas A, Localized Scleroderma Clinical and Ultrasound Study Group
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To develop and evaluate a Localized Scleroderma (LS) Skin Severity Index (LoSSI) and global assessments' clinimetric property and effect on quality of life (QOL).
METHODS: A 3-phase study was conducted. The first phase involved 15 patients with LS and 14 examiners who assessed LoSSI [surface area (SA), erythema (ER), skin thickness (ST), and new lesion/extension (N/E)] twice for inter/intrarater reliability. Patient global assessment of disease severity (PtGA-S) and Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) were collected for intrarater reliability evaluation. The second phase was aimed to develop clinical determinants for physician global assessment of disease activity (PhysGA-A) and to assess its content validity. The third phase involved 2 examiners assessing LoSSI and PhysGA-A on 27 patients. Effect of training on improving reliability/validity and sensitivity to change of the LoSSI and PhysGA-A was determined.
RESULTS: Interrater reliability was excellent for ER [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) 0.71], ST (ICC 0.70), LoSSI (ICC 0.80), and PhysGA-A (ICC 0.90) but poor for SA (ICC 0.35); thus, LoSSI was modified to mLoSSI. Examiners' experience did not affect the scores, but training/practice improved reliability. Intrarater reliability was excellent for ER, ST, and LoSSI (Spearman's rho = 0.71-0.89) and moderate for SA. PtGA-S and CDLQI showed good intrarater agreement (ICC 0.63 and 0.80). mLoSSI correlated moderately with PhysGA-A and PtGA-S. Both mLoSSI and PhysGA-A were sensitive to change following therapy.
CONCLUSION: mLoSSI and PhysGA-A are reliable and valid tools for assessing LS disease severity and show high sensitivity to detect change over time. These tools are feasible for use in routine clinical practice. They should be considered for inclusion in a core set of LS outcome measures for clinical trials.
METHODS: A 3-phase study was conducted. The first phase involved 15 patients with LS and 14 examiners who assessed LoSSI [surface area (SA), erythema (ER), skin thickness (ST), and new lesion/extension (N/E)] twice for inter/intrarater reliability. Patient global assessment of disease severity (PtGA-S) and Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) were collected for intrarater reliability evaluation. The second phase was aimed to develop clinical determinants for physician global assessment of disease activity (PhysGA-A) and to assess its content validity. The third phase involved 2 examiners assessing LoSSI and PhysGA-A on 27 patients. Effect of training on improving reliability/validity and sensitivity to change of the LoSSI and PhysGA-A was determined.
RESULTS: Interrater reliability was excellent for ER [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) 0.71], ST (ICC 0.70), LoSSI (ICC 0.80), and PhysGA-A (ICC 0.90) but poor for SA (ICC 0.35); thus, LoSSI was modified to mLoSSI. Examiners' experience did not affect the scores, but training/practice improved reliability. Intrarater reliability was excellent for ER, ST, and LoSSI (Spearman's rho = 0.71-0.89) and moderate for SA. PtGA-S and CDLQI showed good intrarater agreement (ICC 0.63 and 0.80). mLoSSI correlated moderately with PhysGA-A and PtGA-S. Both mLoSSI and PhysGA-A were sensitive to change following therapy.
CONCLUSION: mLoSSI and PhysGA-A are reliable and valid tools for assessing LS disease severity and show high sensitivity to detect change over time. These tools are feasible for use in routine clinical practice. They should be considered for inclusion in a core set of LS outcome measures for clinical trials.