Validation of the Atopic Dermatitis Control Tool (ADCT) and a Comparison with the Recap of Atopic Eczema Questionnaire (RECAP).

IF 3.5 4区 医学 Q1 DERMATOLOGY Acta dermato-venereologica Pub Date : 2025-02-18 DOI:10.2340/actadv.v105.42364
Junfen Zhang, Leon Miltner, Laura Loman, Aviël Ragamin, Jart A F Oosterhaven, Marie L A Schuttelaar
{"title":"Validation of the Atopic Dermatitis Control Tool (ADCT) and a Comparison with the Recap of Atopic Eczema Questionnaire (RECAP).","authors":"Junfen Zhang, Leon Miltner, Laura Loman, Aviël Ragamin, Jart A F Oosterhaven, Marie L A Schuttelaar","doi":"10.2340/actadv.v105.42364","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Atopic Dermatitis Control Tool (ADCT) has not been validated in the Dutch population, and comparisons with the Recap of atopic eczema (RECAP) questionnaire are still lacking. This prospective study was conducted at a Dutch tertiary hospital between June 2021 and December 2022, to assess measurement properties of the Dutch ADCT in adults with atopic dermatitis (AD) and compare it with RECAP. Participants completed the ADCT, RECAP, and reference instruments including Patient's Global Assessment (PtGA), Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), quality-of-life questionnaire of the EuroQol Group (EQ-5D-5L), Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) peak itch/sleep disturbance, Skindex-29, and Global Rating of Change (GRC), at baseline, 1-3 days, and 4-12 weeks. Construct validity was assessed through a priori hypotheses, whilst reliability was evaluated with standard error of measurement (SEMagreement) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICCagreement). Interpretability was examined using anchor-based approaches. In total, 196 adults with AD were included. Among a priori hypotheses, 82% (single-score validity) and 59% (responsiveness) were confirmed. The SEMagreement was 1.15, and the ICCagreement was 0.983. The final bandings for the ADCT were established, with a binary cutoff of ≥ 6 indicating uncontrolled AD. The smallest detectable change (SDC) was 3.2, and the minimally important change (MIC) value from predictive modelling was 2.9. Furthermore, the ADCT exhibited high correlations with RECAP at all levels (most correlations being above 0.80). These results demonstrated the Dutch ADCT as a valid, reliable, and responsive tool, and have important clinical implications.</p>","PeriodicalId":6944,"journal":{"name":"Acta dermato-venereologica","volume":"105 ","pages":"adv42364"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta dermato-venereologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2340/actadv.v105.42364","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DERMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Atopic Dermatitis Control Tool (ADCT) has not been validated in the Dutch population, and comparisons with the Recap of atopic eczema (RECAP) questionnaire are still lacking. This prospective study was conducted at a Dutch tertiary hospital between June 2021 and December 2022, to assess measurement properties of the Dutch ADCT in adults with atopic dermatitis (AD) and compare it with RECAP. Participants completed the ADCT, RECAP, and reference instruments including Patient's Global Assessment (PtGA), Patient-Oriented Eczema Measure (POEM), Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), quality-of-life questionnaire of the EuroQol Group (EQ-5D-5L), Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) peak itch/sleep disturbance, Skindex-29, and Global Rating of Change (GRC), at baseline, 1-3 days, and 4-12 weeks. Construct validity was assessed through a priori hypotheses, whilst reliability was evaluated with standard error of measurement (SEMagreement) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICCagreement). Interpretability was examined using anchor-based approaches. In total, 196 adults with AD were included. Among a priori hypotheses, 82% (single-score validity) and 59% (responsiveness) were confirmed. The SEMagreement was 1.15, and the ICCagreement was 0.983. The final bandings for the ADCT were established, with a binary cutoff of ≥ 6 indicating uncontrolled AD. The smallest detectable change (SDC) was 3.2, and the minimally important change (MIC) value from predictive modelling was 2.9. Furthermore, the ADCT exhibited high correlations with RECAP at all levels (most correlations being above 0.80). These results demonstrated the Dutch ADCT as a valid, reliable, and responsive tool, and have important clinical implications.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Acta dermato-venereologica
Acta dermato-venereologica 医学-皮肤病学
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
2.80%
发文量
210
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Dermato-Venereologica publishes high-quality manuscripts in English in the field of Dermatology and Venereology, dealing with new observations on basic dermatological and venereological research, as well as clinical investigations. Each volume also features a number of Review articles in special areas, as well as short Letters to the Editor to stimulate debate and to disseminate important clinical observations. Acta Dermato-Venereologica has rapid publication times and is amply illustrated with a large number of colour photographs.
期刊最新文献
Azathioprine Hypersensitivity Syndrome Mimicking Herpes Zoster and Linear IgA Dermatosis Presentation: A Case Report. Small Papule on the Eyelid of an Early Adolescent Male: A Quiz. The Impact of Atopic Dermatitis on Employment and Productivity: A French Study. Validation of the Atopic Dermatitis Control Tool (ADCT) and a Comparison with the Recap of Atopic Eczema Questionnaire (RECAP). Safety of Dupilumab Therapy for Atopic Dermatitis during Pregnancy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1