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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alsulaimani, Hadeel, Kokandi, Amal, Khawandanh, Shahad, Hamad, Rahf
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