Measurement of the major ignored burden of multiple myeloma, pernicious anaemia and of other haematological conditions on partners and family members: A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Having a haematological condition can adversely affect the quality of life (QoL) of family members/partners of patients. It is important to measure this often ignored burden in order to implement appropriate supportive interventions. OBJECTIVE: To measure current impact of haematological conditions on the QoL of family members/partners of patients, using the Family Reported Outcome Measure-16 (FROM-16). METHODS: A cross-sectional study, recruited online through patient support groups, involved UK family members/partners of people with haematological conditions completing the FROM-16. RESULTS: 183 family members/partners (mean age = 60.5 years, SD = 13.2; females = 62.8%) of patients (mean age = 64.1, SD = 12.8; females = 46.4%) with 12 haematological conditions completed the FROM-16. The FROM-16 mean total score was 14.0 (SD = 7.2), meaning 'a moderate effect on QoL'. The mean FROM-16 scores of family members of people with multiple myeloma (mean = 15.8, SD = 6.3, n = 99) and other haematological malignancies (mean = 13.9, SD = 7.8, n = 29) were higher than of people with pernicious anaemia (mean = 10.7, SD = 7.5, n = 47) and other non-malignant conditions (mean = 11, SD = 7.4, n = 56, p < .01). Over one third (36.1%, n = 183) of family members experienced a 'very large effect' (FROM-16 score>16) on their quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Haematological conditions, in particular those of malignant type, impact the QoL of family members/partners of patients. Healthcare professionals can now, using FROM-16, identify those most affected and should consider how to provide appropriate holistic support within routine practice.

Mapping of Family Reported Outcome Measure (FROM-16) scores to EQ-5D: algorithm to calculate utility values.

OBJECTIVE: Although decision scientists and health economists encourage inclusion of family member/informal carer utility in health economic evaluation, there is a lack of suitable utility measures comparable to patient utility measures such those based on the EQ-5D. This study aims to predict EQ-5D-3L utility values from Family Reported Outcome Measure (FROM-16) scores, to allow the use of FROM-16 data in health economic evaluation when EQ-5D data is not available. METHODS: Data from 4228 family members/partners of patients recruited to an online cross-sectional study through 58 UK-based patient support groups, three research support platforms and Welsh social services departments were randomly divided five times into two groups, to derive and test a mapping model. Split-half cross-validation was employed, resulting in a total of ten multinomial logistic regression models. The Monte Carlo simulation procedure was used to generate predicted EQ-5D-3L responses, and utility scores were calculated and compared against observed values. Mean error and mean absolute error were calculated for all ten validation models. The final model algorithm was derived using the entire sample. RESULTS: The model was highly predictive, and its repeated fitting using multinomial logistic regression demonstrated a stable model. The mean differences between predicted and observed health utility estimates ranged from 0.005 to 0.029 across the ten modelling exercises, with an average overall difference of 0.015 (a 2.2% overestimate, not of clinical importance). CONCLUSIONS: The algorithm developed will enable researchers and decision scientists to calculate EQ-5D health utility estimates from FROM-16 scores, thus allowing the inclusion of the family impact of disease in health economic evaluation of medical interventions when EQ-5D data is not available.

Family reported outcomes, an unmet need in the management of a patient's disease: appraisal of the literature.

BACKGROUND: A person's chronic health condition or disability can have a huge impact on the quality of life (QoL) of the whole family, but this important impact is often ignored. This literature review aims to understand the impact of patients' disease on family members across all medical specialities, and appraise existing generic and disease-specific family quality of life (QoL) measures. METHODS: The databases Medline, EMBASE, CINHAL, ASSIA, PsycINFO and Scopus were searched for original articles in English measuring the impact of health conditions on patients' family members/partner using a valid instrument. RESULTS: Of 114 articles screened, 86 met the inclusion criteria. They explored the impact of a relative's disease on 14,661 family members, mostly 'parents' or 'mothers', using 50 different instruments across 18 specialities including neurology, oncology and dermatology, in 33 countries including the USA, China and Australia. These studies revealed a huge impact of patients' illness on family members. An appraisal of family QoL instruments identified 48 instruments, 42 disease/speciality specific and six generic measures. Five of the six generics are aimed at carers of children, people with disability or restricted to chronic disease. The only generic instrument that measures the impact of any condition on family members across all specialities is the Family Reported Outcome Measure (FROM-16). Although most instruments demonstrated good reliability and validity, only 11 reported responsiveness and only one reported the minimal clinically important difference. CONCLUSIONS: Family members' QoL is greatly impacted by a relative's condition. To support family members, there is a need for a generic tool that offers flexibility and brevity for use in clinical settings across all areas of medicine. FROM-16 could be the tool of choice, provided its robustness is demonstrated with further validation of its psychometric properties.

Comparison of the paper-based and electronic versions of the Dermatology Life Quality Index: evidence of equivalence.

BACKGROUND: The use of patient-reported outcome measures in electronic format has been increasing. However, these formats are usually not validated or compared with the original paper-based formats, so there is no evidence that they are completed in the same way. OBJECTIVES: To compare the conventional paper version with a web-based application (iPad® ) version of the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) to assess equivalence of scores. METHODS: The study employed a randomized crossover design using a within-subjects comparison of the two formats of the questionnaire. International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) guidelines were followed. Participants aged over 18 years with any confirmed skin condition were recruited from a teaching hospital dermatology outpatient clinic. Expected intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0·9 (α = 0·05). RESULTS: A total of 104 patients were recruited, median age 53·5 years (interquartile range 37·3-67·8; 43% male). The ICC showed high concordance between the total DLQI scores from paper and iPad versions (ICC 0·98; 95% confidence interval 0·97-0·99). Patients took a median of 78 s to complete the electronic version and 73 s for paper (P = 0·008): 76% preferred the electronic version and perceived completion to take a shorter time. CONCLUSIONS: There is high concordance and thus equivalence between the iPad and paper versions of the DLQI, with an ICC of 0·98, and a clear patient preference for the iPad version.

Why quality of life measurement is important in dermatology clinical practice: An expert-based opinion statement by the EADV Task Force on Quality of Life.

The aim of this study was to describe the many ways in which quality of life (QoL) measurement may potentially be advantageous in routine clinical dermatology practice. Thirteen members of the EADV Task Force on Quality of Life, eight dermatologists, three health psychologists, one epidemiologist and one pharmacoepidemiologist, independently listed all of the ways they thought this may be advantageous. A total of 108 different ways of using QoL information in clinical practice were suggested (median per participant = 8, range = 4-15), and were classified into 20 descriptive groups. These were sorted into the following five categories: inform clinical decisions, clinician-patient communication, awareness of skin disease burden, informing the consultation and clinical service administration. The wide range of potential benefits identified may not only encourage clinicians to use these measures but also highlights many areas requiring evidence to establish the true value of routine use of QoL measures.

The burden of common skin diseases assessed with the EQ5D™: a European multicentre study in 13 countries.

BACKGROUND: Generic instruments measuring health-related quality of life (HRQoL), like EQ5D™, enable comparison of skin diseases with healthy populations and nondermatological medical conditions, as well as calculation of utility data. OBJECTIVES: To measure HRQoL in patients with common skin diseases and healthy controls across Europe using the EQ5D. METHODS: This multicentre observational cross-sectional study was conducted in 13 European countries. Each dermatology clinic recruited at least 250 consecutive adult outpatients to complete questionnaires, including the EQ5D. RESULTS: There were 5369 participants (4010 patients and 1359 controls). Mean ± SD self-rated health state reported by patients was 69·9 ± 19·7; for controls it was 82·2 ± 15·5. When adjusted for confounding factors, including comorbidity, mean patient EQ visual analogue scores were 10·5 points lower than for controls (standardized ß = -0·23). Odds ratio with 95% confidence interval for impairment in all five dimensions of EQ5D adjusted for confounders was doubled for patients compared with controls. Patients with hidradenitis suppurativa (HS), blistering conditions, leg ulcers, psoriasis and eczemas had the highest risk for reduction in HRQoL in most dimensions (2-10-fold). Data on differences of impairment by dimensions offer new insights. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the large impact skin conditions have on patients' well-being, differentiating between aspects of HRQoL. Patients with HS, blistering diseases, leg ulcers, infections and most chronic skin diseases reported reduced HRQoL compared with patients with chronic obstructive lung disease, diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease and cancers. These findings are important in the prioritization of resource allocation between medical fields and within dermatological subspecialities.

Comparison of the Dermatology Life Quality Index and the Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index in assessment of quality of life in patients with psoriasis aged 16-17 years.

BACKGROUND: Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) are widely used to assess quality of life (QoL) in adults (≥ 16 years) and children (4-16 years) with psoriasis. In the age group 16-17 years, it is not known whether DLQI and CDLQI reflect QoL impairment in the same way. OBJECTIVES: To compare DLQI and CDLQI scores in patients with psoriasis aged 16-17 years. METHODS: Patients with psoriasis aged 16-17 years were asked to complete both the DLQI and CDLQI. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients were included. There was a high correlation between DLQI and CDLQI scores (r = 0·90, P < 0·001). The mean DLQI score (5·41 ± 5·20) was lower than the mean CDLQI (6·61 ± 5·74) (P < 0·001). The major part of this difference (∆0·61) was caused by the low score regarding sexual difficulties in the DLQI (0·11 ± 0·49) and the high score concerning sleep in the CDLQI (0·71 ± 0·93). In addition, the question related to sports scored 0·34 in the DLQI but 0·86 in the CDLQI (∆0·52). The question related to work/study in the DLQI scored lower than the question on school/holiday in the CDLQI (∆0·41). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with psoriasis aged 16-17 years, DLQI and CDLQI scores closely correlate, but the mean DLQI score was lower than the mean CDLQI score. This was caused primarily by differences in the answers to questions regarding sexual difficulties and sleep. As the QoL impacts experienced by people aged 16-17 may differ from those experienced by children or adults, QoL measures designed for use in this age range may have advantages over both child- and adult-specific measures.

The dermatology outpatient discharge decision: understanding a critical but neglected process.

Discharge from dermatology outpatients is a critical endpoint of patient care. Despite this, there has been very little research concerning the discharge process and factors influencing the discharge decision. To identify the factors influencing discharge decisions, articles from 1970 to April 2013 were searched in MEDLINE via Ovid, CINAHL, PROQUEST and Google Scholar using the keywords 'patient discharge', 'discharge decision', 'factors influencing discharge', 'clinical decision making', 'discharge decision making', 'process of discharge decision', 'outpatient', 'follow up', 'skin disease' and 'dermatology'. Only articles describing outpatient discharge decisions were included. Seventeen outpatient discharge articles were identified, 12 from the U.K. (seven dermatology) and five from the U.S.A., Canada, Australia and Taiwan (all nondermatology). The main influences on outpatient discharge identified were diagnosis and disease severity, clinician's level of experience and perception, patient's preferences, patient's behaviour and quality of life. These influences affected the clinician's judgement on discharge decisions both in appropriate and in inappropriate ways. Little is known concerning discharge decision making in dermatology. Given the central importance of such decisions in the appropriate care of patients and the efficient running of any dermatology service, greater understanding of the influences on discharge decision making is needed. It is therefore critical for dermatologists to be aware of these influences and to ensure that decisions are taken only in the best interests of patients. Further research is required to inform the training of dermatologists on how to take the most appropriate discharge decisions.

The role of the EQ-5D in the economic evaluation of dermatological conditions and therapies.

Economic evaluation is an increasingly important aspect of assessment of the burden of skin diseases. Although dermatology data were not used in its development, the use of the EQ-5D questionnaire has been encouraged by the requirement of health technology assessment agencies for utility comparisons informing reimbursement decisions. The aim of this review was to examine the use of the EQ-5D in dermatology and to consider its future role in the economic evaluation of skin diseases. Published studies reporting the use of the EQ-5D in the economic analysis of skin diseases were carefully examined. Nineteen articles and 1 abstract published between 2003 and 2011 were identified, in which cost-of-illness, cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses were described. The EQ-5D is not a dermatology-specific measure, and it is not yet clear whether it is the most appropriate measure to support economic evaluation in the context of dermatology.

Nonclinical influences, beyond diagnosis and severity, on clinical decision making in dermatology: understanding the gap between guidelines and practice.

BACKGROUND: Clinical decision making in dermatology is a complex process and might be influenced by a wide range of nonclinical factors. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to explore the role of nonclinical influences, beyond diagnosis and severity, on clinical decision making in dermatology. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 46 clinicians working in departments of dermatology of nine different hospitals in Wales. Interviews were audio-recorded and later transcribed and their contents analysed. RESULTS: Nonclinical factors influencing patient management decisions in dermatology that were identified related to patients, clinicians and practice characteristics. Patient-related factors included place of residence, socioeconomic circumstances, education and intelligence, ethnicity, age, treatment adherence, expectations from treatment, quality of life, concerns and worries, difficult patients, and family members or friends. Clinician-related factors included time constraints in clinic, clinicians' personal circumstances, relationship with colleagues, and relationship with pharmaceutical companies. Practice-related factors included working in private practice, cost of treatment to the National Health Service (NHS), prescribing bureaucracy, and availability of treatment service in the work place. There was a difference between the consultants' views and those of the other clinicians over the impact of pharmaceutical companies on clinicians' prescribing and the awareness of treatment costs to the NHS. Most of the factors identified could potentially influence the clinicians' decision-making process subconsciously. Some clinicians highlighted that these factors are untaught in the medical curriculum, and are usually ignored in clinical guidelines, and therefore represent a challenge to the practice of evidence-based medicine. CONCLUSIONS: This study has described one aspect of the reality of medical decision making beyond the conventional evidence-based guidelines approach. Proper understanding of nonclinical influences on decision making is of paramount importance for the best patient-centred treatment outcomes.

Non-clinical influences on clinical decision-making: a major challenge to evidence-based practice.

This article reviews an aspect of daily clinical practice which is of critical importance in virtually every clinical consultation, but which is seldom formally considered. Non-clinical influences on clinical decision-making profoundly affect medical decisions. These influences include patient-related factors such as socioeconomic status, quality of life and patient's expectations and wishes, physician-related factors such as personal characteristics and interaction with their professional community, and features of clinical practice such as private versus public practice as well as local management policies. This review brings together the different strands of knowledge concerning non-clinical influences on clinical decision-making. This aspect of decision-making may be the biggest obstacle to the reality of practising evidence-based medicine. It needs to be understood in order to develop clinical strategies that will facilitate the practice of evidence-based medicine.

The Family Dermatology Life Quality Index: measuring the secondary impact of skin disease.

BACKGROUND: Skin diseases are known to have a major impact on the lives of patients and their families. Many instruments are available to measure the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients but no measure has been developed so far to quantify the secondary impact on family members of the patients. OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate a dermatology-specific instrument to measure the adverse impact on the HRQoL of family members of patients with skin disease. METHODS: Detailed semi-structured interviews were conducted with family members of patients to identify different aspects of HRQoL affected. An initial draft version of the questionnaire based on the main topic areas was pilot tested to assess the face and content validity. A 10-item questionnaire, the Family Dermatology Life Quality Index (FDLQI), was finalized after modifications to the draft questionnaire based on feedback from families and dermatology professionals and on item reduction. Psychometric evaluation was conducted on a new cohort of family members (n = 132) who completed the FDLQI and the patients (n = 109) who completed the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). RESULTS: Fifty-nine different aspects of family members' HRQoL were identified from the analysis of the interviews, which were categorized into main topic areas. Factor analysis of 10 items of the final questionnaire revealed two factors and together these explained 60% of the common variance. The FDLQI demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.88) and test-retest (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.94) reliabilities. The responsiveness of the instrument to change was shown by significant change in the family members' FDLQI scores in cases where patients' clinical condition either improved or worsened. Construct validity was assessed by testing a number of a priori hypotheses. A strong correlation was seen between the family members' FDLQI scores and patients' DLQI scores (r = 0.69), a significantly higher FDLQI score was seen for inflammatory skin diseases compared with noninflammatory diseases/isolated lesions (P < 0.0001), and there was a positive relationship between the family members' FDLQI scores and patients' disease severity (r = 0.49). CONCLUSIONS: The FDLQI is simple and practical and seems to have the potential to be used as an additional outcome measure in clinical practice and evaluation research.

Erythropoietic protoporphyria in the U.K.: clinical features and effect on quality of life.

BACKGROUND: Erythropoietic protoporphyria (EPP) is a rare inherited photodermatosis that causes lifelong painful photosensitivity. Neither its full clinical spectrum nor its impact on quality of life (QoL) has been investigated in a large cohort of patients. OBJECTIVES: To document the clinical features of EPP and its impact on QoL in a high proportion of all patients with EPP resident in the U.K. METHODS: Patients with EPP were identified from U.K. clinical databases and assessed by the same clinical investigator over a 7-month period using a standardized proforma and validated adult (Dermatology Life Quality Index, DLQI) and children's (Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index, CDLQI) QoL questionnaires. RESULTS: Three hundred and eighty-nine living patients with EPP were identified, of whom 223 [114 females, 109 males; median age 34 years (range: 5-87), from 193 families] were investigated. Total erythrocyte porphyrin (TEP) was higher in males (median: 25.3 micromol L1) than females (median: 19.3 micromol L1). The median ages at onset and diagnosis were 1 and 12 years, respectively. Median times for onset of symptoms after sun exposure, onset of signs (oedema, erythema) and resolution of symptoms were 20 min, 6 h and 3 days, respectively. Most patients reported absence of protection by glass (92%), priming (85%), exacerbation by wind (68%), no family history of photosensitivity (56%), no symptoms during winter (56%) and had chronic skin lesions (79%). Symptoms changed little with age but improved during pregnancy in 47% of gravid women. Most patients used protective clothing and a sunscreen; 28% were taking beta-carotene and a further 56% had taken it; 29% were not under regular medical care. Two patients (1%) had liver failure and 8% reported gallstone disease. QoL was markedly impaired, with scores similar to those in severe dermatological disease (mean DLQI score 14.0, n = 176; mean CDLQI score 12.8, n = 44), indicating a large effect on patients' lives. DLQI scores correlated weakly with TEP (rs = 0.228; P = 0.002) and time to onset of symptoms (rs = -0.233; P = 0.002) but not with age at onset. CONCLUSIONS: EPP is a persistent, severely painful, socially disabling disease with a marked impact on QoL. Its diagnosis is often overlooked. None of TEP, age at onset nor time to onset of symptoms is a useful predictor of impaired QoL in individual patients.

The Infants' Dermatitis Quality of Life Index.

BACKGROUND: The impact on quality of life (QOL) caused by atopic dermatitis (AD) has been quantified in children and adults using established QOL measures. However, these are not suitable for use in infants under the age of 4 years, when AD usually develops. OBJECTIVES: To validate a new parent-generated QOL questionnaire, the Infants' Dermatitis QOL Index (IDQOL), which measures the impact of AD on the infant, and to provide further validation of the Family Dermatitis Index (FDI), which measures the impact of a child's dermatitis on the family. METHODS: Parents of 102 predominately caucasian infants under 4 years with AD (34 postal and 68 outpatients) were asked to complete the IDQOL and the FDI on two separate occasions to test for repeat validity. The Infants' Behavioural Check List (BCL) was also given to the study group and to parents of 22 normal control infants. Post-treatment IDQOL and FDI questionnaires were obtained from 25 of the study group. RESULTS: The return rate for initial questionnaires was 87.3% (61 boys, 28 girls) and for retest 70.6%. The mean score for IDQOL was 7.89 and for FDI 8.87. Spearman rank correlation between the IDQOL and FDI was high (r = 0.87). Correlations of IDQOL and FDI with clinical severity assessment by parents were lower (r = 0.58 for IDQOL and r = 0.5 for FDI). Test-retest data for IDQOL and FDI confirmed repeatability, there being negligible differences between the pairs using the method of Bland and Altman. The three highest scoring questions for IDQOL referred to itching and scratching, mood change and sleep disturbance. For the FDI they were parental sleep disturbance, tiredness and exhaustion, and emotional distress. Post-treatment questionnaires from 25 patients indicated sensitivity to clinical change with both IDQOL and FDI. Parameters of behaviour measured using the BCL in 82 study infants and 22 controls showed greater problems with frequent night-time wakening (43% vs. 4.5%) and miserable mood changes (24.4% vs. 9%) in the study infants. CONCLUSIONS: Initial validation of the IDQOL and further validation of the FDI show good test-retest repeatability and apparent sensitivity to change with treatment. The effect on health-related QOL as measured by these methods is poorly correlated with clinical severity, confirming that QOL measures should be used in conjunction with clinical measures for global assessments of disease impact. This work requires further validation but suggests that QOL measures may be useful as outcome measures in clinical practice and research. Their simple construction allows quick and easy use, which is particularly valuable in large-scale and postal studies.

Dowling Oration 2000. Dermatology patients: what do they really need?

Dermatology services must be organized to meet the needs of patients. These needs change as society changes and medical knowledge increases. Considerable insight into the true needs of individual and groups of patients can be gained from the use of quality of life measures. Patients with widespread inflammatory skin disease are most severely handicapped by their skin disease and can be most helped by dermatology services. It is essential that such patients be given priority in the delivery of dermatological care. Where necessary, protected clinic time and specialist support services should be created to ensure that such patients are not adversely affected by pressures to review patients in other diagnostic groups.

The family impact of childhood atopic dermatitis: the Dermatitis Family Impact Questionnaire.

Little information is available about the effect of childhood atopic dermatitis (AD) on family function. The aim of this study was to identify the areas of family life most affected and their perceived importance. Intensive qualitative interviews with 34 families were conducted and 11 basic problem areas were identified. A detailed questionnaire was prepared, part of which addressed the perceived importance of particular issues using the framework of multi-attribute utility theory. The results from using this questionnaire in 41 families were analysed and a shorter 10-question one-page Dermatitis Family Impact (DFI) questionnaire designed (maximum score = 30). In affected families the mean DFI score was 9.6 +/- 7.0 (range 0-27, n = 56) and in unaffected families the mean score was 0.4 +/- 0.9 (range 0-3, n = 26, P < 0.0001). The DFI could potentially be used as an extra measure in clinical studies, or to help guide appropriate management of AD.