Cargando…

Emollient satisfaction questionnaire: validation study in children with eczema

BACKGROUND: Emollients are used as maintenance therapy for all severities of eczema but there is a lack of head‐to‐head comparisons of effectiveness and acceptability. AIM: To determine the validity of a self‐report questionnaire designed to assess user satisfaction with a given emollient and to rep...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rowley, Georgia G., MacNeill, Stephanie J., Ridd, Matthew J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9321994/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35315540
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ced.15189
_version_ 1784756187704590336
author Rowley, Georgia G.
MacNeill, Stephanie J.
Ridd, Matthew J.
author_facet Rowley, Georgia G.
MacNeill, Stephanie J.
Ridd, Matthew J.
author_sort Rowley, Georgia G.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Emollients are used as maintenance therapy for all severities of eczema but there is a lack of head‐to‐head comparisons of effectiveness and acceptability. AIM: To determine the validity of a self‐report questionnaire designed to assess user satisfaction with a given emollient and to report the findings. METHODS: Data were analysed from the Choice of Moisturiser for Eczema Treatment trial, which compared four emollient types (Aveeno(®) lotion, Diprobase(®) cream, Doublebase(®) gel and Hydromol(®) ointment) in children aged < 5 years with clinically diagnosed eczema. An emollient satisfaction questionnaire was completed after 12 weeks. Responses for individual items were scored from 0 to 4. Total scores ranged from 0 to 28 (low to high satisfaction). Completion rates and distributions of responses for individual items and total scores, categorized by emollient type, were assessed, and two hypotheses were tested to determine the questionnaire's construct validity. RESULTS: Data from 77.2% (152 of 197) of participants were analysed. One item was rejected because of a high rate (44.7%) of ‘don't know’ responses, leaving seven items with high completion rates (98.7%) and weak evidence of floor or ceiling effects. A positive association was observed between total score and overall emollient satisfaction (Spearman correlation 0.78; P < 0.001). Total scores were highest (mean ± SD 23.5 ± 3.9) in the lotion group and lowest (18.4 ± 4.6) in the ointment group. CONCLUSION: The emollient satisfaction questionnaire appears to have good validity. Further work is required to validate the questionnaire in other settings and to assess its reliability.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9321994
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93219942022-07-30 Emollient satisfaction questionnaire: validation study in children with eczema Rowley, Georgia G. MacNeill, Stephanie J. Ridd, Matthew J. Clin Exp Dermatol Original Articles BACKGROUND: Emollients are used as maintenance therapy for all severities of eczema but there is a lack of head‐to‐head comparisons of effectiveness and acceptability. AIM: To determine the validity of a self‐report questionnaire designed to assess user satisfaction with a given emollient and to report the findings. METHODS: Data were analysed from the Choice of Moisturiser for Eczema Treatment trial, which compared four emollient types (Aveeno(®) lotion, Diprobase(®) cream, Doublebase(®) gel and Hydromol(®) ointment) in children aged < 5 years with clinically diagnosed eczema. An emollient satisfaction questionnaire was completed after 12 weeks. Responses for individual items were scored from 0 to 4. Total scores ranged from 0 to 28 (low to high satisfaction). Completion rates and distributions of responses for individual items and total scores, categorized by emollient type, were assessed, and two hypotheses were tested to determine the questionnaire's construct validity. RESULTS: Data from 77.2% (152 of 197) of participants were analysed. One item was rejected because of a high rate (44.7%) of ‘don't know’ responses, leaving seven items with high completion rates (98.7%) and weak evidence of floor or ceiling effects. A positive association was observed between total score and overall emollient satisfaction (Spearman correlation 0.78; P < 0.001). Total scores were highest (mean ± SD 23.5 ± 3.9) in the lotion group and lowest (18.4 ± 4.6) in the ointment group. CONCLUSION: The emollient satisfaction questionnaire appears to have good validity. Further work is required to validate the questionnaire in other settings and to assess its reliability. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-05-16 2022-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9321994/ /pubmed/35315540 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ced.15189 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Clinical and Experimental Dermatology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Rowley, Georgia G.
MacNeill, Stephanie J.
Ridd, Matthew J.
Emollient satisfaction questionnaire: validation study in children with eczema
title Emollient satisfaction questionnaire: validation study in children with eczema
title_full Emollient satisfaction questionnaire: validation study in children with eczema
title_fullStr Emollient satisfaction questionnaire: validation study in children with eczema
title_full_unstemmed Emollient satisfaction questionnaire: validation study in children with eczema
title_short Emollient satisfaction questionnaire: validation study in children with eczema
title_sort emollient satisfaction questionnaire: validation study in children with eczema
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9321994/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35315540
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ced.15189
work_keys_str_mv AT rowleygeorgiag emollientsatisfactionquestionnairevalidationstudyinchildrenwitheczema
AT macneillstephaniej emollientsatisfactionquestionnairevalidationstudyinchildrenwitheczema
AT riddmatthewj emollientsatisfactionquestionnairevalidationstudyinchildrenwitheczema