Patient-reported outcomes in hidradenitis suppurativa: A review
Vellaichamy G, Braunberger TL, Jones JL, Peacock A, Nahhas AF, Hamzavi IH. Patient-reported outcomes in hidradenitis suppurativa: A review. G Ital Dermatol Venereol 2019; 154(2):137-147.
G Ital Dermatol Venereol
Hidradenitis suppurativa, also known as acne inversa, is a chronic recurrent inflammatory disease of the skin making management challenging and continuously evolving. A large number of modalities exist aimed at quantifying the efficacy of treatment in studies on hidradenitis suppurativa. Both physician-reported and patient-reported outcomes are used as endpoints in these studies; however, the vast majority of the modalities used to survey these reported outcomes lack validation and congruence between studies. Heterogeneity of outcome measures and lack of standardization from study to study make it difficult to design future hidradenitis suppurativa trials and to compare results. This high variability between studies further contributes to the lack of high- quality evidence available to guide clinical management decisions of this inflammatory skin disease. Therefore this review aims to assess the modalities frequently used to assess patient- reported treatment outcomes in hidradenitis suppurativa. Patient-reported outcomes in hidradenitis suppurativa include outcomes regarding symptoms and disease progression, measures of treatment satisfaction, quality of life surveys, impairment of function, pain, and patient-reported outcomes combined with physician-reported outcomes. Nearly all surveys demonstrate significant heterogeneity, lack standardization, and many are not validated or constructed specifically for the assessment of hidradenitis suppurativa. Yet patient-reported outcomes on symptoms and disease severity, treatment satisfaction, and quality of life are instrumental in evaluating hidradenitis suppurativa treatment efficacy in clinical trials. As such, standardization and validation of patient- reported outcome instruments are essential for comparability among studies and improved quality of evidence.