RESUMO
Background/Objectives: There is currently no guidance on how to interpret the global degrees of activity (worsening) and repigmentation (improvement) in vitiligo. Stratification into global degrees can be completed for static evaluations (e.g., visible disease activity signs) and dynamic assessments (e.g., evolution over time). For the latter, the Vitiligo Disease Activity Score (VDAS15&60) and Vitiligo Disease Improvement Score (VDIS15&60) were recently validated. Methods: In the current study, a Physician Global Assessment (PGA) for disease activity (worsening) and repigmentation (improvement) was evaluated for validity (construct) and reliability (inter- and intrarater) based on a photo set of 66 patients. Subsequently, the PGA activity (worsening) and repigmentation (improvement) were used to stratify the Vitiligo Extent Score plus (VESplus), VDAS15&60 or VDIS15&60 into three global categories (slightly, moderately and much worse/improved), based on ROC analysis. Results: For the VESplus, cut-off values for the categories 'slightly, moderately and much worse' were >0.3%, >27.71% and >128.75% BSA (relative changes in the affected total BSA), respectively. For the categories 'slightly, moderately and much improved', they were >0%, >4.87% and >36.88% BSA (relative changes in the affected total BSA), respectively. The optimal cut-off values of the number of active (VDAS15) body areas were >0 areas for slightly worse, >2 areas for moderately worse and >7 for much worse. For VDIS15, the cut-off values for slightly improved and moderately improved were >0 and >1. For VDAS60 and VDIS60, the cut-off points were >0.5, >3, >9.5 and >0.5 and >1.5, respectively. The results should be interpreted with caution in patients with extensive vitiligo due to the rather limited disease extent of the included patient population (VESplus (median: 3.2%)). Conclusions: This research will aid in the development of more detailed international definitions.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: The Outcome measures for vascular malformation (OVAMA) group reached consensus on the core outcome domains for the core outcome set (COS) for peripheral vascular malformations (venous, lymphatic and arteriovenous malformations). However, it is unclear which instruments should be used to measure these domains. Therefore, our aims were to identify all outcome measurement instruments available for vascular malformations, and to evaluate their measurement properties. METHODS: With the first literature search, we identified outcomes and instruments previously used in prospective studies on vascular malformations. A second search yielded studies on measurement properties of patient- and physician-reported instruments that were either developed for vascular malformations, or used in prospective studies. If the latter instruments were not specifically validated for vascular malformations, we performed a third search for studies on measurement properties in clinically similar diseases (vascular or lymphatic diseases and benign tumors). We assessed the methodological quality of these studies following the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments methodology, and evaluated the quality of the measurement properties. RESULTS: The first search yielded 27 studies, none using disease-specific instruments. The second and third search included 22 development and/or validation studies, concerning six instruments. Only the Lymphatic Malformation Function Instrument was developed specifically for vascular malformations. Other instruments were generic QoL instruments developed and/or partly validated for clinically similar diseases. CONCLUSIONS: Additional research on measurement properties is needed to assess which instruments may be included in the COS. This review informs the instrument selection and/or the development of new instruments. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, 42017056242.