Franche Comté University and Dermatology Department, Besançon, France.
J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2010 Apr;24 Suppl 2:10-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-3083.2009.03562.x.
A wide variety of scoring systems have been proposed to assess severity of psoriasis. Given its importance as a health issue both for patients and health care systems, it is critically important to evaluate the validity and reliability of existing outcome measures.
The objective of this systematic review was to assess the extent of validation including the validity, reliability, sensitivity to change and ease of use of available outcome measures for psoriasis.
We conducted a systematic review of all clinical studies (prospective and retrospective) investigating the severity of psoriasis patients and published between January 1980 and June 2009. The following methodological validation and quality criteria were recorded systematically: construct validity, content validity and internal consistency, intra-observer variation and inter-observer variation, sensitivity to change and acceptability/ease of use assessed as time required to perform measurement.
Based on methodological validation and quality criteria, six clinical severity scores were selected and analysed (PASI, BSA, PGA, LS-PGA, SPI and SAPASI scores). We did not find substantial evidence of construct validity for any of the psoriasis clinical severity scores. Content validity was studied by considering the PASI score as gold standard. The relative content validity was good for the LS-PGA, PGA, and SPI scores, which correlated strongly with the PASI score. The SAPASI and PASI scores showed moderate correlation. Internal consistency was good for the PASI and LS-PGA scores. The PASI, BSA, PGA and LS-PGA scores displayed limited intra-observer variation. The inter-observer variation was low for LS-PGA (ICC < 0.5) and SAPASI, moderate for PASI, SPI and PGA and high for BSA (ICC > 0.8). The PASI score and the SAPASI displayed moderate sensitivity to change.
Based on this systematic review, it appears that none of the severity scores used for psoriasis meets all of the validation criteria required for an ideal score. However, we can conclude that the PASI score is the most extensively studied psoriasis clinical severity score and the most thoroughly validated according to methodological validation criteria. Despite certain limitations, use of the PASI score can be recommended for scientific evaluation of the clinical severity of psoriasis.
已经提出了各种各样的评分系统来评估银屑病的严重程度。鉴于其对患者和医疗保健系统的健康问题都很重要,因此评估现有结局测量的有效性和可靠性至关重要。
本系统评价的目的是评估可用于银屑病的现有结局测量的验证程度,包括有效性、可靠性、对变化的敏感性和易用性。
我们对 1980 年 1 月至 2009 年 6 月间发表的所有调查银屑病患者严重程度的临床研究(前瞻性和回顾性)进行了系统评价。系统地记录了以下方法学验证和质量标准:结构有效性、内容有效性和内部一致性、观察者内变异性和观察者间变异性、对变化的敏感性以及评估作为测量所需时间的可接受性/易用性。
基于方法学验证和质量标准,选择并分析了六种临床严重程度评分(PASI、BSA、PGA、LS-PGA、SPI 和 SAPASI 评分)。我们没有发现任何银屑病临床严重程度评分具有实质性结构有效性的证据。通过将 PASI 评分视为金标准来研究内容有效性。LS-PGA、PGA 和 SPI 评分的相对内容有效性较好,与 PASI 评分相关性强。SAPASI 和 PASI 评分显示中度相关性。PASI 和 LS-PGA 评分的内部一致性良好。PASI、BSA、PGA 和 LS-PGA 评分的观察者内变异性有限。LS-PGA(ICC<0.5)和 SAPASI 的观察者间变异性较低,PASI、SPI 和 PGA 的变异性为中度,BSA(ICC>0.8)的变异性较高。PASI 评分和 SAPASI 评分对变化的敏感性为中度。
根据本系统评价,似乎没有一种用于银屑病的严重程度评分符合理想评分所需的所有验证标准。然而,我们可以得出结论,PASI 评分是最广泛研究的银屑病临床严重程度评分,根据方法学验证标准,它的验证最彻底。尽管存在某些局限性,但可以推荐使用 PASI 评分来科学评估银屑病的临床严重程度。