系统性硬化症三种医生总体评估工具的比较。

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 RHEUMATOLOGY Arthritis Care & Research Pub Date : 2024-09-03 DOI:10.1002/acr.25427
Laura Ross, Dylan Hansen, Susanna Proudman, Jennifer Walker, Kimti Kumar, Wendy Stevens, Nava Ferdowsi, Joanne Sahhar, Gene-Siew Ngian, Diane Apostolopoulos, Lauren V Host, Kathleen Morrisroe, Gabor Major, Murray Baron, Mandana Nikpour
{"title":"系统性硬化症三种医生总体评估工具的比较。","authors":"Laura Ross, Dylan Hansen, Susanna Proudman, Jennifer Walker, Kimti Kumar, Wendy Stevens, Nava Ferdowsi, Joanne Sahhar, Gene-Siew Ngian, Diane Apostolopoulos, Lauren V Host, Kathleen Morrisroe, Gabor Major, Murray Baron, Mandana Nikpour","doi":"10.1002/acr.25427","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Physician global assessments (PhyGAs) are variably applied in systemic sclerosis (SSc) clinical trials. The comparability of different PhyGA results is unknown. We sought to assess the comparability of results from three different PhyGA instruments simultaneously applied in the Australian Scleroderma Cohort Study (ASCS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using data from 1,965 ASCS participants, we assessed the correlation between results of three PhyGA assessments: (1) overall health, (2) activity, and (3) damage. We evaluated the concordance of change in each PhyGA between study visits. Ordered logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the clinical associations of each PhyGA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The absolute scores of each PhyGA were strongly correlated at individual study visits. Concordant changes of the PhyGA scores occurred between 50% of study visits. Only patient-reported breathlessness was associated with all three PhyGA scores (overall health: odds ratio [OR] 1.67, P < 0.01; activity: OR 1.44, P < 0.01; damage: OR 1.32, P < 0.01). Changes in physician-assessed activity scores were also associated with patient-reported worsening skin disease (OR 1.25, P = 0.03) and fecal incontinence (OR 1.23, P = 0.01), whereas damage scores were associated with respiratory disease (pulmonary arterial hypertension: OR 1.25, P = 0.03; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: OR 1.37, P = 0.04), as well as skin scores (OR 1.02, P < 0.01) and fecal incontinence (OR 1.21, P = 0.02).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PhyGAs of overall health, activity, and damage are each associated with different SSc features, and changes in different PhyGA scores are discordant 50% of the time. Our findings suggest results of variably worded PhyGAs are not directly interchangeable and support the development of a standardized PhyGA.</p>","PeriodicalId":8406,"journal":{"name":"Arthritis Care & Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Three Physician Global Assessment Instruments in Systemic Sclerosis.\",\"authors\":\"Laura Ross, Dylan Hansen, Susanna Proudman, Jennifer Walker, Kimti Kumar, Wendy Stevens, Nava Ferdowsi, Joanne Sahhar, Gene-Siew Ngian, Diane Apostolopoulos, Lauren V Host, Kathleen Morrisroe, Gabor Major, Murray Baron, Mandana Nikpour\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/acr.25427\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Physician global assessments (PhyGAs) are variably applied in systemic sclerosis (SSc) clinical trials. The comparability of different PhyGA results is unknown. We sought to assess the comparability of results from three different PhyGA instruments simultaneously applied in the Australian Scleroderma Cohort Study (ASCS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using data from 1,965 ASCS participants, we assessed the correlation between results of three PhyGA assessments: (1) overall health, (2) activity, and (3) damage. We evaluated the concordance of change in each PhyGA between study visits. Ordered logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the clinical associations of each PhyGA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The absolute scores of each PhyGA were strongly correlated at individual study visits. Concordant changes of the PhyGA scores occurred between 50% of study visits. Only patient-reported breathlessness was associated with all three PhyGA scores (overall health: odds ratio [OR] 1.67, P < 0.01; activity: OR 1.44, P < 0.01; damage: OR 1.32, P < 0.01). Changes in physician-assessed activity scores were also associated with patient-reported worsening skin disease (OR 1.25, P = 0.03) and fecal incontinence (OR 1.23, P = 0.01), whereas damage scores were associated with respiratory disease (pulmonary arterial hypertension: OR 1.25, P = 0.03; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: OR 1.37, P = 0.04), as well as skin scores (OR 1.02, P < 0.01) and fecal incontinence (OR 1.21, P = 0.02).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PhyGAs of overall health, activity, and damage are each associated with different SSc features, and changes in different PhyGA scores are discordant 50% of the time. Our findings suggest results of variably worded PhyGAs are not directly interchangeable and support the development of a standardized PhyGA.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8406,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arthritis Care & Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arthritis Care & Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.25427\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RHEUMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthritis Care & Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.25427","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:在系统性硬化症(SSc)临床试验中,医生全局评估(PhyGA)的应用各不相同。不同 PhyGA 结果的可比性尚不清楚。我们试图评估同时应用于澳大利亚硬皮病队列研究(ASCS)的三种不同 PhyGA 工具得出的结果的可比性:方法:我们利用 1,965 名 ASCS 参与者的数据,评估了三种 PhyGA 评估结果之间的相关性:(1) 整体健康;(2) 活动;(3) 损伤。我们还评估了研究访问期间每项 PhyGA 变化的一致性。我们使用有序逻辑回归分析来评估每项PhyGA的临床关联性:结果:在各次检查中,每个 PhyGA 的绝对得分都有很强的相关性。50%的研究访问中,PhyGA评分出现了一致的变化。只有患者报告的呼吸困难与所有三项 PhyGA 评分相关(总体健康:OR 1.67,P<0.05):OR 1.67,p结论:医生对总体健康、活动和损害的全面评估与不同的 SSc 特征相关,不同 PhyGA 评分的变化在 50% 的时间内不一致。我们的研究结果表明,不同措辞的PhyGAs结果不能直接互换,因此支持开发标准化的PhyGA。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Comparison of Three Physician Global Assessment Instruments in Systemic Sclerosis.

Objective: Physician global assessments (PhyGAs) are variably applied in systemic sclerosis (SSc) clinical trials. The comparability of different PhyGA results is unknown. We sought to assess the comparability of results from three different PhyGA instruments simultaneously applied in the Australian Scleroderma Cohort Study (ASCS).

Methods: Using data from 1,965 ASCS participants, we assessed the correlation between results of three PhyGA assessments: (1) overall health, (2) activity, and (3) damage. We evaluated the concordance of change in each PhyGA between study visits. Ordered logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the clinical associations of each PhyGA.

Results: The absolute scores of each PhyGA were strongly correlated at individual study visits. Concordant changes of the PhyGA scores occurred between 50% of study visits. Only patient-reported breathlessness was associated with all three PhyGA scores (overall health: odds ratio [OR] 1.67, P < 0.01; activity: OR 1.44, P < 0.01; damage: OR 1.32, P < 0.01). Changes in physician-assessed activity scores were also associated with patient-reported worsening skin disease (OR 1.25, P = 0.03) and fecal incontinence (OR 1.23, P = 0.01), whereas damage scores were associated with respiratory disease (pulmonary arterial hypertension: OR 1.25, P = 0.03; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: OR 1.37, P = 0.04), as well as skin scores (OR 1.02, P < 0.01) and fecal incontinence (OR 1.21, P = 0.02).

Conclusion: PhyGAs of overall health, activity, and damage are each associated with different SSc features, and changes in different PhyGA scores are discordant 50% of the time. Our findings suggest results of variably worded PhyGAs are not directly interchangeable and support the development of a standardized PhyGA.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
6.40%
发文量
368
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Arthritis Care & Research, an official journal of the American College of Rheumatology and the Association of Rheumatology Health Professionals (a division of the College), is a peer-reviewed publication that publishes original research, review articles, and editorials that promote excellence in the clinical practice of rheumatology. Relevant to the care of individuals with rheumatic diseases, major topics are evidence-based practice studies, clinical problems, practice guidelines, educational, social, and public health issues, health economics, health care policy, and future trends in rheumatology practice.
期刊最新文献
The State of the Advanced Practice Provider in Rheumatology. Transcriptional Profiling of Tofacitinib Treatment in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: Implications for Treatment Response Prediction. Issue Information Area-level socioeconomic status impacts healthcare visit frequency by Australian inflammatory arthritis patients: results from the Australian Rheumatology Association Database. Building the OAChangeMap to improve the service delivery of the New South Wales Osteoarthritis Chronic Care Program: a worked example of using a co-design framework.
×
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