European journal of internal medicine · 2007
Digital photography as an operational tool for assessing corticosteroid-induced lipodystrophy.
Сравнительное исследованиеОценочное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Fardet Laurence, Kettaneh Adrien, Tiev Kiet-Phong, Fabre Bénédicte, Tolédano Cécile, Cabane Jean, Flahault Antoine
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Corticosteroid-induced lipodystrophy (CIL) is exclusively diagnosed in a subjective manner.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the reliability of digital photographs in the diagnosis of CIL.
METHODS: All consecutive patients starting long-term, high dosage corticosteroid therapy were photographed at baseline and after 3 months of therapy. At the end of the study, 3 physicians with expertise in corticosteroids classified patients as lipodystrophic yes/no/unclassifiable. Photographs analyses performed by 9 medical readers and evaluation of CIL using visual analog scale (VAS) performed during the M3 visit were compared to this classification.
RESULTS: Eighty-eight patients were monitored. Fifty of them were classified by the 3 experts as lipodystrophic and 30 as not lipodystrophic (8 were unclassifiable). Their intra- and inter-observer agreements were moderate or fair (kappa coefficient<or=0.57) when month 3 photographs were analysed alone and substantial or near perfect (kappa coefficient>or=0.75) when M3 photographs were analysed beside baseline ones. By comparison with expert consensus, only 3 out of 4 patients were correctly classified using VAS. The AUROC curve and inter-observer agreement significantly improved with experience for the 9 non-experts.
CONCLUSION: The use of digital photographs do better than VAS to evaluate CIL. The accuracy of diagnosis improves with experience. Morphological changes are more important than morphological phenotype.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the reliability of digital photographs in the diagnosis of CIL.
METHODS: All consecutive patients starting long-term, high dosage corticosteroid therapy were photographed at baseline and after 3 months of therapy. At the end of the study, 3 physicians with expertise in corticosteroids classified patients as lipodystrophic yes/no/unclassifiable. Photographs analyses performed by 9 medical readers and evaluation of CIL using visual analog scale (VAS) performed during the M3 visit were compared to this classification.
RESULTS: Eighty-eight patients were monitored. Fifty of them were classified by the 3 experts as lipodystrophic and 30 as not lipodystrophic (8 were unclassifiable). Their intra- and inter-observer agreements were moderate or fair (kappa coefficient<or=0.57) when month 3 photographs were analysed alone and substantial or near perfect (kappa coefficient>or=0.75) when M3 photographs were analysed beside baseline ones. By comparison with expert consensus, only 3 out of 4 patients were correctly classified using VAS. The AUROC curve and inter-observer agreement significantly improved with experience for the 9 non-experts.
CONCLUSION: The use of digital photographs do better than VAS to evaluate CIL. The accuracy of diagnosis improves with experience. Morphological changes are more important than morphological phenotype.