Quality of life measurement in occupational skin diseases. Position paper of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Forces on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes and Occupational Skin Disease

Global Guidelines in Dermatology Mapping Project (GUIDEMAP)-A systematic review of the methodological quality of contact dermatitis clinical practice guidelines

The Global Guidelines in Dermatology Mapping Project (GUIDEMAP) assesses the methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for high-burden skin diseases. This review focuses on contact dermatitis. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Emcare, Epistemonikos, PsycINFO and Academic Search Premier for CPGs published between 1 November 2018 and 1 November 2023. Prespecified guideline resources were hand searched. Two authors independently undertook screening, data extraction and quality assessments. Instruments used were the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II Reporting Checklist, the U.S. Institute of Medicine's (IOM) criteria of trustworthiness, The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's National Guideline Clearinghouse Extent Adherence to Trustworthy Standards (NEATS) Instrument and Lenzer's Red Flags. Twenty five CPGs were included, exhibiting heterogeneity in both the topics they addressed and their methodological quality. Whereas the CPGs on management of hand eczema from Denmark, Europe and the Netherlands scored best, most CPGs fell short of being clear, unbiased, trustworthy and evidence-based. Disclosure of conflicts of interest scored well, and areas needing improvement include 'strength and wording of recommendations', 'applicability', 'updating' and 'external review'. Adhering to AGREE II and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) enhances methodological quality.

Bullying in persons with skin diseases

BACKGROUND

There are few studies on bullying in skin diseases. Persons with skin diseases are especially prone to bullying.

OBJECTIVES

This component of the project 'Bullying among Dermatologic Patients' aimed to study the prevalence and nature of bullying in patients with skin diseases from different countries and age groups.

METHODS

Data were collected from participants of international social media groups for patients with skin diseases, in-patients and out-patients with skin diseases, and parents of children with skin diseases from six European countries. School and university students from Poland and Ukraine were asked to answer the question: Have you been bullied because of skin problems?

RESULTS

Bullying was reported in 1016 patients with 36 different skin diseases. Prevalence of self-reported and parental-reported bullying was quite heterogeneous among different countries In total, self-reported bullying was noted by 25.6% of patients with skin diseases during face-to-face consultations, by 63.7% of respondents from international patients' groups and by 12.2% of school and university students. Parental-reported bullying was detected in 34.5% of 3-4 years old children with skin diseases. The peak of bullying prevalence occurred between the ages of 13 and 15. The most prevalent forms of bullying were verbal abuse and social isolation. Physical abuse was the least often reported form of bullying. Only 33.2% of participants talked to anyone about being bullied. Negative long-term effects of bullying were reported by 63% of respondents.

CONCLUSIONS

Skin disease-related bullying was reported by patients in all centres of the project. The main manifestations of bullying were similar in different countries and among patients with different skin diseases. International activities aimed to decrease or prevent skin disease-related bullying in different age groups are needed. These activities should be multidirectional and target teachers, parents of classmates and classmates of children with skin diseases, patients' parents and patients themselves.

Quality of life measurement in teledermatology. Position statement of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Forces on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes and Teledermatology

Many events, including the COVID-19 pandemic, have accelerated the implementation of teledermatology pathways within dermatology departments and across healthcare organizations. Quality of Life (QoL) assessment in dermatology is also a rapidly developing field with a gradual shift from theory to practice. The purpose of this paper organized jointly by the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Task Force (TF) on QoL and patient-oriented outcomes and the EADV TF on teledermatology is to present current knowledge about QoL assessment during the use of teledermatology approaches, including data on health-related (HR) QoL instruments used in teledermatology, comparison of influence of different treatment methods on HRQoL after face-to-face and teledermatology consultations and to make practical recommendations concerning the assessment of QoL in teledermatology. The EADV TFs made the following position statements: HRQoL assessment may be an important part in most of teledermatology activities; HRQoL assessment may be easily and effectively performed during teledermatology consultations. It is especially important to monitor HRQoL of patients with chronic skin diseases during lockdowns or in areas where it is difficult to reach a hospital for face-to-face consultation; regular assessment of HRQoL of patients with skin diseases during teledermatology consultations may help to monitor therapy efficacy and visualize individual patient's needs; we recommend the use of the DLQI in teledermatology, including the use of the DLQI app which is available in seven languages; it is important to develop apps for dermatology-specific HRQoL instruments for use in children (for example the CDLQI and InToDermQoL) and for disease-specific instruments.

Quality of life measurement in rosacea. Position statement of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Forces on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes and Acne, Rosacea and Hidradenitis Suppurativa

The European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Task Forces (TFs) on Quality of Life (QoL) and Patient-Oriented Outcomes and Acne, Rosacea and Hidradenitis Suppurativa (ARHS) do not recommend the use of any generic instrument as a single method of Health Related (HR) QoL assessment in rosacea, except when comparing quimp (quality of life impairment) in rosacea patients with that in other non-dermatologic skin diseases and/or healthy controls. The EADV TFs on QoL and Patient-Oriented Outcomes and ARHS recommend the use of the dermatology-specific HRQoL instrument the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and the rosacea-specific HRQoL instrument RosaQoL in rosacea patients. The DLQI minimal clinically important difference may be used as a marker of clinical efficacy of the treatment and DLQI score banding of 0 or 1 corresponding to no effect on patients' HRQoL could be an important treatment goal. This information may be added to consensuses and guidelines for rosacea.

Quality of life measurement in vitiligo. Position statement of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Force on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes with external experts

Members of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Task Force on Quality of Life (QoL) and Patient Oriented Outcomes reviewed the instruments available for health-related (HR) QoL assessment in vitiligo and together with external vitiligo experts (including representatives of the EADV Vitiligo Task Force) have made practical recommendations concerning the assessment of QoL in vitiligo patients. The Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) was the most frequently used HRQoL instrument, making comparison of results between different countries possible. Several vitiligo-specific instruments were identified. The vitiligo Impact Scale (VIS) is an extensively validated vitiligo-specific HRQoL instrument with proposed minimal important change and clinical interpretation for VIS-22 scores. VIS-22 was developed for use in India, where there are some specific cultural beliefs concerning vitiligo. The EADV Task Force on QoL and Patient Oriented Outcomes recommends use of the DLQI and the Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) as dermatology-specific instruments in vitiligo. There is a strong need for a valid (including cross-cultural validation) vitiligo-specific instrument that can be either a new instrument or the improvement of existing instruments. This validation must include the proof of responsiveness.

Impact on quality of life of an intervention providing additional information to patients with allergic contact dermatitis; a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Allergic contact dermatitis can negatively impact an individual's daily life in terms of work and interpersonal relationships. Patch-tested individuals show an improved quality of life (QoL).

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess the impact on QoL after patch testing and what value an intervention would have on QoL.

METHODS

Dermatology Quality of Life Index (DLQI) were assessed in participants with positive patch test reaction. The participants were randomized, in parallel design, into two groups that received either standard information (controls, n = 70) or a reminder letter in addition to standard information (intervention group, n = 66), ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01953380.

RESULTS

The response rate was 74% (n = 136). The DLQI score was significantly lower 1 year after patch testing in comparison with baseline in the entire group (mean DLQI 6.3 and 4.5 respectively, 95% CI 0.93-2.72, P < 0.001). However, linear regression analyses showed no significant differences in DLQI score at follow-up between the intervention and control groups. Neither age nor gender had impact on DLQI score.

CONCLUSION

There was an improvement of QoL at follow-up in the entire group. However, the intervention performed did not show any significantly greater improvement concerning QoL. Further research is needed to understand what factors apart from patch testing and medical care may affect QoL in patients with contact dermatitis, and what interventions are needed to improve QoL.

Quality of life in patients with allergic and immunologic skin diseases: in the eye of the beholder

Allergic and immunologic skin diseases negatively impact the quality of life (QoL) of affected patients with detrimental consequences. Nonetheless, in everyday clinical practice the evaluation of QoL is often overlooked. Considering the increasing prevalence of atopic dermatitis, allergic contact dermatitis, hereditary angioedema, cutaneous mastocytosis, and urticaria, it is essential to determine the effects of allergic and immunologic skin diseases on QoL. A joint meeting (GET TOGETHER 2021) of the Italian Society of Allergology, Asthma and Clinical Immunology (SIAAIC) and the Italian Society of Allergological, Occupational and Environmental Dermatology (SIDAPA) aimed to summarize the features of the main QoL tools used in these diseases and to describe the extent of QoL impairment as well as the impact of treatments on QoL, particularly biologic therapies. The assessment of QoL in patients with allergic and immunologic skin diseases relies on generic, organ-specific and disease-specific questionnaires. While generic and organ-specific questionnaires allow comparison between different diseases, disease-specific questionnaires are designed and validated for specific cohorts: the QoL Index for Atopic Dermatitis (QoLIAD) and the Childhood Atopic Dermatitis Impact Scale (CADIS) in atopic dermatitis, the ACD-11 in allergic contact dermatitis, the Angioedema QoL Questionnaire (AE-QoL) and the Hereditary Angioedema QoL questionnaire (HAE-QoL) in hereditary angioedema, the Mastocytosis QoL Questionnaires (MCQoL e MQLQ) in cutaneous mastocytosis, and the Chronic Urticaria QoL questionnaire (CU-Q2oL) in urticaria. Among the many factors that variably contribute to QoL impairment, pruritus can represent the leading cause of patient discomfort. Biologic therapies significantly ameliorate QoL in atopic dermatitis, hereditary angioedema, mastocytosis and chronic urticaria. In general, adequate management strategies are essential for improving QoL in patients with allergic and immunologic skin diseases.

Quality of life assessment in core outcome sets: A position statement of the EADV Task Force on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes

Core outcome sets (COSs) are an agreed standardized collection of outcomes that should be measured and reported in all clinical trials for a specific clinical condition. Tsekhe aim of our position paper by the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Task Force on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes was to identify the challenges and Patient Oriented Outcomes advantages in the development of COSs within dermatological QoL research. Twelve EADV Task Force multidisciplinary team members presented a total of 101 items (51 advantages and 50 disadvantages). All participants considered that COS are beneficial for comparison between different studies, treatments, dermatological diseases, geographical location and ethnicities. In conclusion, the EADV Task Force on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes has recognized the primacy of advantages of COS and deliberated that the disadvantages in COS are related to development process and use of COS.

Quality of life measurement in alopecia areata. Position statement of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Force on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes

New treatment options may lead to an increased interest in using reliable and sensitive instruments to assess health-related quality of life in people with alopecia areata (AA). The purpose of this paper is to present current knowledge about quality of life assessment in AA. The dermatology-specific Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) was the most widely reported health-related quality of life instrument used in AA. Three AA-specific (Alopecia Areata Symptom Impact Scale, Alopecia Areata Quality of Life Index and Alopecia Areata Patients' Quality of Life) and three hair disease-specific instruments (Hairdex, Scalpdex and 'hair-specific Skindex-29') were identified with a range of content and validation characteristics: there is little evidence yet of the actual use of these measures in AA. Scalpdex is the best-validated hair disease-specific instrument. Further extensive validation is needed for all of the AA-specific instruments. The European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Force on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes recommends the use of the dermatology-specific DLQI questionnaire, hair disease-specific Scalpdex and the alopecia areata-specific instruments the Alopecia Areata Symptom Impact Scale or Alopecia Areata Quality of Life Index, despite the limited experience of their use. We hope that new treatment methods will be able to improve both clinical signs and health-related quality of life in patients with AA. In order to assess the outcomes of trials on these new treatment methods, it would be helpful when further development and validation of AA-specific instruments is being encouraged and also conducted.

Quality of Life in Hidradenitis Suppurativa: An Update

Knowledge on hidradenitis suppurativa/acne inversa (HS) is rapidly increasing. HS has a profound impact on patients and their family life. Several factors, such as comorbidities, unemployment and HS severity, make this impact even more severe. The most widely used instrument to measure this impact is the dermatology-specific DLQI. We also identified six HS-specific health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instruments. Of them, HIDRAdisk, HSIA, HiSQOL and HSQoL-24 are better validated but there is still lack of experience of its use. Several treatment methods showed positive effect on patients’ HRQoL. Surgery remains a method with a substantial positive effect on HRQoL. Several studies confirming a positive effect of adalimumab on the HRQoL of patients with HS were published during the last three years. Data on the influence of several other biologics on HRQoL of HS patients are controversial or based on studies with a small number of patients.

Methods to improve quality of life, beyond medicines. Position statement of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Force on Quality of Life and Patient Oriented Outcomes

The pharmaceutical approach to skin disease has been hugely successful, but despite effective drugs being available and used, there are still vast numbers of people who continue to have some level of persisting skin disease and continue to experience quality of life (QoL) impairment. So the question that needs to be answered, while we await further advances in our drug-based armamentarium, is how can we improve patients' QoL, beyond drugs? A working group was formed from members of the EADV Task Force on QoL and Patient Oriented Outcomes. Participants were asked to suggest all the ways in which they considered patients' QoL may be improved beyond medicines. Four groups of management approaches that may improve QoL in dermatology were identified: interventions within the dermatology service (hospitalization, multidisciplinary teams, patch testing and establishing relevant allergens and education), external services (corrective make-up, climatotherapy and balneotherapy), psychological (psychological intervention, cognitive therapy, hypnosis), lifestyle (lifestyle behavioural changes, religion and spirituality and music). The ultimate aim of therapy is to eradicate a disease in an individual and return the person's life to normal. But until the day comes when this has been achieved for every skin disease and for every patient there will be a need to support and assist many patients in additional non-pharmaceutical ways. These 'adjuvant' approaches receive too little attention while dermatologists and researchers strive for better pharmacological therapy. The different ways in which patients may benefit have been reviewed in our paper, but the reality is that most have a very poor evidence base. The research challenges that we have to meet are to identify those approaches that might be of value and to provide evidence for their optimal use. In the meantime, clinicians should consider the use of these approaches where QoL remains impaired despite optimal use of standard therapy.

Prospective study on hand dermatitis in nurses and doctors during COVID-19 pandemic and its improvement by use of adopted recommendations of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Force on Contact Dermatitis

Frequency of hand disinfection and adverse skin reactions among health care workers dramatically increased since the COVID-19 outbreak and consensus recommendations on hand hygiene were presented. The aim of the present study was to check the efficacy of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV) Task Force (TF) on Contact Dermatitis (CD) recommendations in a real life and to search if providing products mentioned in that recommendations may increase its efficacy. Doctors and nurses who worked with patients during COVID-19 pandemic and use hand disinfectants received adopted recommendations of the EADV TF on CD only or together with mentioned in that recommendations gel with ethanol and glycerin and emollient. Prevalence of adverse skin reactions on hand disinfectants at baseline was 80.21%. In a month significant improvement of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and self-assessed improvement of hand skin (P < .01 for both) was reported in "products" group only. Number of participants that had no impact on their HRQoL became higher and the Dermatology Life Quality Index scores lower than in "recommendations only" group (P = .03 and P = .02, respectively). Our results showed that recommendations of the EADV TF on CD may significantly improve HRQoL and hand skin status in health care professionals but provision with products mentioned in that recommendations is crucial.