Cargando…
Severity of Acne Vulgaris: Comparison of Two Assessment Methods
PURPOSE: Numerous tools are available to assess acne severity. It is important to have an acceptable and easy to use tool for acne assessment for many reasons, such as initial assessment and follow-ups, clinical trials, and comparisons of clinical studies. The aim was to investigate the agreement be...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7532287/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33061511 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CCID.S266320 |
_version_ | 1783589893510791168 |
---|---|
author | Alsulaimani, Hadeel Kokandi, Amal Khawandanh, Shahad Hamad, Rahf |
author_facet | Alsulaimani, Hadeel Kokandi, Amal Khawandanh, Shahad Hamad, Rahf |
author_sort | Alsulaimani, Hadeel |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Numerous tools are available to assess acne severity. It is important to have an acceptable and easy to use tool for acne assessment for many reasons, such as initial assessment and follow-ups, clinical trials, and comparisons of clinical studies. The aim was to investigate the agreement between different observers (inter-observer variation) in the evaluation using the Global Acne Grading System (GAGS) and Investigator Global Assessment of Acne (IGA). Besides, to investigate the correlation between the assessment scores and its relation to the quality of life scales Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and the Cardiff Acne Disability Index (CADI). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective study. Four investigators involved to evaluate the study subject surveyed 54 patients complaining of acne using IGA and GAGS scores (DLQI and CADI). RESULTS: A significant relation was seen between GAGS and IGA (Pearson chi-square test p= 0.001), and they demonstrated excellent inter-rater reliability. There was no correlation between IGA and quality of life measures (CADI nor DLQI). However, there was a significant weak correlation between GAGS and CADI. CONCLUSION: The two methods for acne severity assessment are reliable, and they are correlated. Quality of life concerning acne is not correlated with the severity of the disease. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7532287 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Dove |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75322872020-10-14 Severity of Acne Vulgaris: Comparison of Two Assessment Methods Alsulaimani, Hadeel Kokandi, Amal Khawandanh, Shahad Hamad, Rahf Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol Original Research PURPOSE: Numerous tools are available to assess acne severity. It is important to have an acceptable and easy to use tool for acne assessment for many reasons, such as initial assessment and follow-ups, clinical trials, and comparisons of clinical studies. The aim was to investigate the agreement between different observers (inter-observer variation) in the evaluation using the Global Acne Grading System (GAGS) and Investigator Global Assessment of Acne (IGA). Besides, to investigate the correlation between the assessment scores and its relation to the quality of life scales Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and the Cardiff Acne Disability Index (CADI). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective study. Four investigators involved to evaluate the study subject surveyed 54 patients complaining of acne using IGA and GAGS scores (DLQI and CADI). RESULTS: A significant relation was seen between GAGS and IGA (Pearson chi-square test p= 0.001), and they demonstrated excellent inter-rater reliability. There was no correlation between IGA and quality of life measures (CADI nor DLQI). However, there was a significant weak correlation between GAGS and CADI. CONCLUSION: The two methods for acne severity assessment are reliable, and they are correlated. Quality of life concerning acne is not correlated with the severity of the disease. Dove 2020-09-28 /pmc/articles/PMC7532287/ /pubmed/33061511 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CCID.S266320 Text en © 2020 Alsulaimani et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php). |
spellingShingle | Original Research Alsulaimani, Hadeel Kokandi, Amal Khawandanh, Shahad Hamad, Rahf Severity of Acne Vulgaris: Comparison of Two Assessment Methods |
title | Severity of Acne Vulgaris: Comparison of Two Assessment Methods |
title_full | Severity of Acne Vulgaris: Comparison of Two Assessment Methods |
title_fullStr | Severity of Acne Vulgaris: Comparison of Two Assessment Methods |
title_full_unstemmed | Severity of Acne Vulgaris: Comparison of Two Assessment Methods |
title_short | Severity of Acne Vulgaris: Comparison of Two Assessment Methods |
title_sort | severity of acne vulgaris: comparison of two assessment methods |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7532287/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33061511 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CCID.S266320 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT alsulaimanihadeel severityofacnevulgariscomparisonoftwoassessmentmethods AT kokandiamal severityofacnevulgariscomparisonoftwoassessmentmethods AT khawandanhshahad severityofacnevulgariscomparisonoftwoassessmentmethods AT hamadrahf severityofacnevulgariscomparisonoftwoassessmentmethods |