Search

Background: Multiple clinician‐reported outcome measures exist for atopic dermatitis (AD) severity. However, there is no gold standard for use in clinical practice. Objectives: To determine the measurement properties of the product of validated Investigator's Global Assessment for AD (vIGA) and body surface area (BSA) overall or divided into six categories (cBSA: 0%/0.1, <10%/10, <30%/30, <50%/50, <70%/70 and <90%/90–100%) and compare with other clinician‐reported and patient‐reported outcomes in adults and children with AD. Methods: We performed a prospective dermatology practice‐based study using questionnaires and evaluation by a dermatologist (n = 653). Results: vIGA*BSA and vIGA*cBSA had good convergent validity with BSA (Spearman's ρ = 0.97 and 0.93), eczema area and severity index (ρ = 0.94 and 0.92), and objective SCORAD (ρ = 0.88 and 0.89); and weak‐to‐good convergent validity with Numeric Rating Scale average itch (ρ = 0.22 and 0.22) and worst itch (ρ = 0.27 and 0.28), Patient‐Oriented Eczema Measure (ρ = 0.44 and 0.43), Dermatology Life Quality Index (ρ = 0.48 and 0.49), ItchyQOL (ρ = 0.45 and 0.46), PROMIS Sleep Disturbance (ρ = 0.46 and 0.37) and sleep‐related impairment (ρ = 0.31 and 0.31) in adults and/or children; very good discriminant validity for physician‐reported global AD severity; good responsiveness to change of severity of AD and itch; and good reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [95% confidence interval]: 0.72 [0.60–0.81] and 0.74 [0.62–0.82]) with no floor or ceiling effects. Thresholds for interpretability bands and clinically important difference were established. Conclusions: vIGA*BSA and vIGA*cBSA scores showed good convergent and discriminant validity, reliability, responsiveness and interpretability in adults and children with AD, and were feasible for use in clinical practice. vIGA*BSA and vIGA*cBSA had slightly lower convergent validity than EASI or objective SCORAD, but might be more efficient to collect and score. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Self Assessment Vitiligo Extent Score (SA‐VES) is a validated, patient‐reported outcome measure to assess the body surface area affected with vitiligo. Information on how to translate the obtained score into extent, severity and impact strata (mild–moderate–severe) is still lacking. Stratification is helpful to define inclusion criteria for trials, enables comparison and pooling of trial results and can be used for epidemiological research. Objectives: The aim was to develop extent, severity and impact strata for the SA‐VES based on validated anchor‐based questions. Methods: In total, 315 patients with vitiligo (non‐segmental; age ≥ 16) recruited at the Ghent University Hospital (Belgium) completed a questionnaire that was conducted in cooperation with the Dutch Society for vitiligo patients to ensure content validity. First three anchor questions included in the questionnaire [Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) for vitiligo extent, severity and impact] were assessed for content validity, construct validity and intrarater reliability. Subsequently, the PtGAs were used to stratify the SA‐VES based on ROC analysis. Results: For all PtGAs (PtGA extent, PtGA severity, PtGA impact), at least 75% of hypotheses evaluated for construct validity were confirmed. Intrarater reliability of all PtGAs was good to excellent (ICCs PtGA extent: 0.623; PtGA severity: 0.828; PtGA impact: 0.851). The optimal cut‐off values of the SA‐VES between the three global categories (mild/limited – moderate – severe/extensive) were 1.05% and 6.45% based on PtGA extent, 2.07% and 4.8% based on PtGA severity and 2% and 3.35% based on PtGA impact. Conclusion: This study provides the first guide for the interpretation of the numerical output obtained by the SA‐VES (vitiligo extent) and enables the translation into a global vitiligo grading for extent, severity and impact. As patients' interpretation of vitiligo extent, severity and impact may vary amongst patients worldwide, future international studies will be required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]