2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in sarcoidosis

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Patients with sarcoidosis present with a variety of symptoms which may impair many aspects of physical and mental well-being. Traditionally, clinicians have been concerned with physical health aspects of sarcoidosis, assessing disease activity and severity with radiological imaging, pulmonary function and blood tests. However, the most reported symptom of sarcoidosis patients, fatigue, has been shown not to correlate with the most commonly used parameters for monitoring disease activity. Studies have shown poor agreement between physicians and patients in assessing sarcoidosis symptoms. This underlines the importance of patient reported outcomes (PROs) in addition to traditional outcomes in order to provide a complete evaluation of the effects of interventions in clinical trials and everyday clinical assessment of sarcoidosis. We have undertaken a systematic review to identify and provide an overview of PRO concepts used in sarcoidosis assessment the past 20 years and to evaluate the tools used for measuring these concepts, called patient reported outcome measures (PROMs). Various PROMs have been used. By categorizing these PROMs according to outcome we identified the key PRO concepts for sarcoidosis to be Health Status and Quality of Life, Dyspnea, Fatigue, Depression, Anxiety and Stress and Miscellaneous. There is no perfect sarcoidosis-specific PROM to cover all concepts and future intervention studies should therefore contain multiple complementary questionnaires. Based on our findings we recommend the Fatigue Assessment Scale (FAS) for assessing fatigue. Dyspnea scores should be chosen based on their purpose; more research is needed to examine their validity in sarcoidosis. The Modified Medical Research Council Dyspnea Scale (MRC) can be used to screen for dyspnea and the Baseline Dyspnea Index (BDI) to detect changes in dyspnea. We recommend The World Health Organization Quality of Life assessment instrument (WHOQOL-100) for assessing quality of life, although a shorter questionnaire would be preferable. For assessing health status we recommend the Sarcoidosis Assessment Tool (SAT), and have great expectations for this new and promising assessment tool. Supplementary to the WASOG meeting of 2011’s recommendation on assessing QoL, we recommend incorporating fatigue, dyspnea and HS assessment in clinical trials and everyday clinical assessment of sarcoidosis. (Sarcoidosis Vasc Diffuse Lung Dis 2017; 34: 2-17)

          Related collections

          Most cited references134

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Sarcoidosis.

          Sarcoidosis is a systemic disease of unknown cause that is characterised by the formation of immune granulomas in various organs, mainly the lungs and the lymphatic system. Studies show that sarcoidosis might be the result of an exaggerated granulomatous reaction after exposure to unidentified antigens in individuals who are genetically susceptible. Several new insights have been made, particularly with regards to the diagnosis and care of some important manifestations of sarcoidosis. The indications for endobronchial ultrasound in diagnosis and for PET in the assessment of inflammatory activity are now better specified. Recognition of unexplained persistent disabling symptoms, fatigue, small-fibre neurological impairment, cognitive failure, and changes to health state and quality of life, has improved. Mortality in patients with sarcoidosis is higher than that of the general population, mainly due to pulmonary fibrosis. Predicted advances for the future are finding the cause of sarcoidosis, and the elucidation of relevant biomarkers, reliable endpoints, and new efficient treatments, particularly in patients with refractory sarcoidosis, lung fibrosis, and those with persistent disabling symptoms. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Psychometric qualities of a brief self-rated fatigue measure: The Fatigue Assessment Scale.

            The main aim of this study was to examine the dimensionality and psychometric qualities of a new 10-item fatigue measure, the Fatigue Assessment Scale (FAS). As part of a longitudinal study, the respondents, all workers with at least 20 working hours per week, completed the FAS, four related fatigue measures, a depression questionnaire, and an emotional stability scale. The FAS had a high internal consistency. The pattern of correlations and factor analysis showed good convergent and divergent validity. The FAS correlated strongly with the other fatigue scales. In a factor analysis of the five fatigue questionnaires, the FAS had the highest factor loading on a clear one-factor solution. Moreover, factor analyses revealed that fatigue, on the one hand, and depression and emotional stability, on the other hand, are separate constructs. Finally, it was shown that 8 out of the 10 FAS items were unbiased concerning gender; two had a uniform bias. The FAS represents a potentially valuable assessment instrument with promising internal consistency reliability and validity. Gender bias in the FAS does not have consequences for use of the FAS.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The measurement of dyspnea. Contents, interobserver agreement, and physiologic correlates of two new clinical indexes.

              To improve the clinical measurement of dyspnea, we developed a baseline dyspnea index that rated the severity of dyspnea at a single state and a transition dyspnea index that denoted changes from that baseline. The scores in both indexes depend on ratings for three different categories: functional impairment; magnitude of task, and magnitude of effort. At the baseline state, dyspnea was rated in five grades from 0 (severe) to 4 (unimpaired) for each category. The ratings for each of the three categories were added to form a baseline focal score (range, 0 to 12). At the transition period, changes in dyspnea were rated by seven grades, ranging from -3 (major deterioration), to +3 (major improvement). The ratings for each of the three categories were added to form a transition focal score (range, -9 to +9). In 38 patients tested with respiratory disease, interobserver agreement was highly satisfactory for both indexes. The baseline focal score had the highest correlation (r = 0.60; P less than 0.001) with the 12-minute walking distance (12 MW), while significant, but lower, correlations existed for lung function. For the transition focal score, there was a significant correlation only with the 12 MW (r = 0.33; p = 0.04). These results indicate that dyspnea can receive a direct clinical rating that provides important information not disclosed by customary physiologic tests.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Sarcoidosis Vasc Diffuse Lung Dis
                Sarcoidosis Vasc Diffuse Lung Dis
                Sarcoidosis, Vasculitis, and Diffuse Lung Diseases
                Mattioli 1885 (Italy )
                1124-0490
                2532-179X
                2017
                28 April 2017
                : 34
                : 1
                : 2-17
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Internal Medicine Orkdale, St. Olavs University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway
                [2 ]Department of Respiratory Diseases and Allergology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
                [3 ]Department of Medicine, Lillebaelt Hospital, Vejle, Denmark
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Rikke Flor Thunold Lokes Veg 6, 7033 Trondheim, Norway E-mail: rfthunold@ 123456outlook.com
                Article
                SVDLD-34-2
                10.36141/svdld.v34i1.5760
                7170118
                32476819
                7370192c-3a07-425e-9146-b3ce073a60d4
                Copyright: © 2017

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

                History
                : 22 September 2016
                : 27 September 2016
                Categories
                Review

                sarcoidosis,questionnaires,patient reported outcome,prom,pro,clinical trial,clinical assessment

                Comments

                Comment on this article