Bożek Agnieszka, Reich Adam
Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Allergology, Wroclaw Medical University, Poland.
Adv Clin Exp Med. 2017 Aug;26(5):851-856. doi: 10.17219/acem/69804.
A wide variety of psoriasis assessment tools have been proposed to evaluate the severity of psoriasis in clinical trials and daily practice. The most frequently used clinical instrument is the psoriasis area and severity index (PASI); however, none of the currently published severity scores used for psoriasis meets all the validation criteria required for an ideal score.
The aim of this study was to compare and assess the reliability of 3 commonly used assessment instruments for psoriasis severity: the psoriasis area and severity index (PASI), body surface area (BSA) and physician global assessment (PGA).
On the scoring day, 10 trained dermatologists evaluated 9 adult patients with plaque-type psoriasis using the PASI, BSA and PGA. All the subjects were assessed twice by each physician. Correlations between the assessments were analyzed using the Pearson correlation coefficient. Intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated to analyze intra-rater reliability, and the coefficient of variation (CV) was used to assess inter-rater variability.
Significant correlations were observed among the 3 scales in both assessments. In all 3 scales the ICCs were > 0.75, indicating high intra-rater reliability. The highest ICC was for the BSA (0.96) and the lowest one for the PGA (0.87). The CV for the PGA and PASI were 29.3 and 36.9, respectively, indicating moderate inter-rater variability. The CV for the BSA was 57.1, indicating high inter-rater variability.
Comparing the PASI, PGA and BSA, it was shown that the PGA had the highest inter-rater reliability, whereas the BSA had the highest intra-rater reliability. The PASI showed intermediate values in terms of interand intra-rater reliability. None of the 3 assessment instruments showed a significant advantage over the other. A reliable assessment of psoriasis severity requires the use of several independent evaluations simultaneously.
在临床试验和日常实践中,人们提出了各种各样的银屑病评估工具来评估银屑病的严重程度。最常用的临床工具是银屑病面积和严重程度指数(PASI);然而,目前已发表的用于银屑病的严重程度评分均未满足理想评分所需的所有验证标准。
本研究旨在比较和评估3种常用的银屑病严重程度评估工具的可靠性:银屑病面积和严重程度指数(PASI)、体表面积(BSA)和医生整体评估(PGA)。
在评分日,10名经过培训的皮肤科医生使用PASI、BSA和PGA对9名成年斑块型银屑病患者进行评估。每位医生对所有受试者进行两次评估。使用Pearson相关系数分析评估之间的相关性。计算组内相关系数(ICC)以分析评分者内信度,并使用变异系数(CV)评估评分者间的变异性。
在两次评估中,3种量表之间均观察到显著相关性。在所有3种量表中,ICC均>0.75,表明评分者内信度高。BSA的ICC最高(0.96),PGA的ICC最低(0.87)。PGA和PASI的CV分别为29.3和36.9,表明评分者间变异性中等。BSA的CV为57.1,表明评分者间变异性高。
比较PASI、PGA和BSA,结果显示PGA的评分者间信度最高,而BSA的评分者内信度最高。PASI在评分者间和评分者内信度方面显示出中间值。3种评估工具均未显示出比其他工具具有显著优势。对银屑病严重程度进行可靠评估需要同时使用几种独立评估方法。