Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Atopic Dermatitis and Chronic Urticaria are Underused in Clinical Practice

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are validated and standardized tools that complement physician evaluations and guide treatment decisions. PROMs are crucial for monitoring atopic dermatitis (AD) and chronic urticaria (CU) in clinical practice, but there are unmet needs and knowledge gaps regarding their use in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the global real-world use of AD and CU PROMs in allergology and dermatology clinics as well as their associated local and regional networks.

METHODS

Across 72 specialized allergy and dermatology centers and their local and regional networks, 2,534 physicians in 73 countries completed a 53-item questionnaire on the use of PROMs for AD and CU.

RESULTS

Of 2,534 physicians, 1,308 were aware of PROMs. Of these, 14% and 15% used PROMs for AD and CU, respectively. Half of physicians who use PROMs do so only "rarely" or "sometimes". AD and CU PROM usage is associated with being female, younger, and a dermatologist. POSCORAD and UAS were the most utilized PROMs for AD and CU, respectively. Monitoring disease control and activity are the main drivers of the use of PROMs. Time constraints were the primary obstacle to using PROMs, followed by the impression that patients dislike PROMs. AD and CU PROM users would like training in selecting the proper PROM.

CONCLUSION

Even though PROMs offer several benefits, their use in routine practice is suboptimal, and physicians perceive barriers to their use. It is essential to attain higher levels of PROM implementation in accordance with national and international standards.

Translating and adapting the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) for use in the Russian Federation: A multicentre pilot study to inform validation procedures

Aims: The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) is one of the most widely used screening instruments worldwide. Although it was translated into many languages, not many country-specific adaptations exist, and a formal validation procedure of the Russian version has been carried out only recently. The present contribution documents the different steps taken to formally translate and adapt a Russian-specific version of the AUDIT (RUS-AUDIT). Methods: The AUDIT was translated into Russian following an established protocol, revised and adapted to the country context using an expert panel, and field-tested in an iterative approach, in line with WHO rules on instrument translation and adaptation A total of three pilot phases were carried out on 134 patients from primary healthcare (PHC) and 33 patients from specialised alcohol treatment facilities (narcology), guided by a specially established advisory board. Changes in each version were informed by the findings of the previous pilot phase and a thorough panel discussion. Results: Based on the findings of three different pilot phases, the RUS-AUDIT was developed as a paper-and-pencil interview for PHC professionals. Since various issues with representation and counting of standard drinks for the second test item arose, a special show card was developed to support the assessment. Preliminary AUDIT-C scores indicated that more than one-third of the screened women (34.2%) and about half of the screened men (50.9%) from PHC facilities have exceeded risk thresholds. Conclusions: The RUS-AUDIT was constructed as a feasible assessment tool for interviewers and patients. The large number of PHC patients who exceed the risk threshold has corroborated the need for formal validation and Russia-specific cut-off scores, considering the specific drinking patterns.