{"title":"临床环境中银屑病面积和严重程度指数的观察者间差异","authors":"N. Dias, B. Kishore, D. Sukumar","doi":"10.4103/mjmsr.mjmsr_1_20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Severity scoring systems are important parameters in assessing the severity of a disease aiding in categorization of disease and its prompt treatment. However, reliability of these scoring systems and inter-observer variation is a concern. In the recent years, there has been a lot of debate on reliability of Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) scoring as there is a wide range of difference in the scoring when assessed by each observer. We conducted this study to assess the inter-observer variation of PASI scoring observed in out-patient department of Dermatology at a tertiary care hospital. Methods: Total of 35 patients clinically presenting with chronic plaque type psoriasis, irrespective of disease duration and treatment taken were enrolled in the study. PASI scoring was assessed by 3 different observers (2st year, 3nd year postgraduate residents and clinical staff) independently on each patient and reliability was determined by intra-class coefficient. (ICC). Results: Our study showed an excellent reproducibility of PASI score when an inter-observer variation was performed. Most of the parameters showed an agreement of >0.9 (ICC) which was statistically significant (<0.001). However it was noted that “erythema” in head, upper limbs and lower limbs was in less agreement with ICC when compared to other parameters, yet excellent. Mean PASI score was 10.96, 10.78 and 10.47 among observer 1, 2 and 3 respectively. Conclusion: Our study concludes that PASI is a reproducible and reliable clinical tool with less inter-observer variation if done by trained qualified observers to assess the severity of chronic plaque type psoriasis although its application gets tedious and difficult in busy dermatology clinics. Limitation: A small sample size.","PeriodicalId":19108,"journal":{"name":"Muller Journal of Medical Sciences and Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interobserver variation of psoriasis area and severity index in a clinical setting\",\"authors\":\"N. Dias, B. Kishore, D. Sukumar\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/mjmsr.mjmsr_1_20\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Severity scoring systems are important parameters in assessing the severity of a disease aiding in categorization of disease and its prompt treatment. However, reliability of these scoring systems and inter-observer variation is a concern. In the recent years, there has been a lot of debate on reliability of Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) scoring as there is a wide range of difference in the scoring when assessed by each observer. We conducted this study to assess the inter-observer variation of PASI scoring observed in out-patient department of Dermatology at a tertiary care hospital. Methods: Total of 35 patients clinically presenting with chronic plaque type psoriasis, irrespective of disease duration and treatment taken were enrolled in the study. PASI scoring was assessed by 3 different observers (2st year, 3nd year postgraduate residents and clinical staff) independently on each patient and reliability was determined by intra-class coefficient. (ICC). Results: Our study showed an excellent reproducibility of PASI score when an inter-observer variation was performed. Most of the parameters showed an agreement of >0.9 (ICC) which was statistically significant (<0.001). However it was noted that “erythema” in head, upper limbs and lower limbs was in less agreement with ICC when compared to other parameters, yet excellent. Mean PASI score was 10.96, 10.78 and 10.47 among observer 1, 2 and 3 respectively. Conclusion: Our study concludes that PASI is a reproducible and reliable clinical tool with less inter-observer variation if done by trained qualified observers to assess the severity of chronic plaque type psoriasis although its application gets tedious and difficult in busy dermatology clinics. Limitation: A small sample size.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19108,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Muller Journal of Medical Sciences and Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Muller Journal of Medical Sciences and Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/mjmsr.mjmsr_1_20\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Muller Journal of Medical Sciences and Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/mjmsr.mjmsr_1_20","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:严重程度评分系统是评估疾病严重程度的重要参数,有助于疾病的分类和及时治疗。然而,这些评分系统的可靠性和观察者之间的差异是一个问题。近年来,对于银屑病面积及严重程度指数(Psoriasis Area and Severity Index, PASI)评分的可靠性存在很多争论,因为每个观察者对PASI评分的评估存在很大的差异。我们进行了这项研究,以评估在三级护理医院皮肤科门诊观察到的PASI评分的观察者间差异。方法:35例临床表现为慢性斑块型银屑病的患者,不论病程和治疗方法。PASI评分由3个不同的观察者(第21年,第3年研究生住院医师和临床工作人员)对每个患者独立评估,可靠性由班级内系数确定。(ICC)。结果:我们的研究表明,当观察者之间发生变化时,PASI评分的可重复性很好。大部分参数的一致性为>.9 (ICC),具有统计学意义(<0.001)。然而,值得注意的是,与其他参数相比,头部、上肢和下肢的“红斑”与ICC的一致性较差,但仍很好。观察者1、观察者2、观察者3的平均PASI评分分别为10.96、10.78、10.47。结论:PASI是一种可重复可靠的临床工具,如果由训练有素的合格观察员来评估慢性斑块型银屑病的严重程度,观察者之间的差异较小,尽管在繁忙的皮肤科诊所中应用它是繁琐和困难的。局限性:样本量小。
Interobserver variation of psoriasis area and severity index in a clinical setting
Background: Severity scoring systems are important parameters in assessing the severity of a disease aiding in categorization of disease and its prompt treatment. However, reliability of these scoring systems and inter-observer variation is a concern. In the recent years, there has been a lot of debate on reliability of Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) scoring as there is a wide range of difference in the scoring when assessed by each observer. We conducted this study to assess the inter-observer variation of PASI scoring observed in out-patient department of Dermatology at a tertiary care hospital. Methods: Total of 35 patients clinically presenting with chronic plaque type psoriasis, irrespective of disease duration and treatment taken were enrolled in the study. PASI scoring was assessed by 3 different observers (2st year, 3nd year postgraduate residents and clinical staff) independently on each patient and reliability was determined by intra-class coefficient. (ICC). Results: Our study showed an excellent reproducibility of PASI score when an inter-observer variation was performed. Most of the parameters showed an agreement of >0.9 (ICC) which was statistically significant (<0.001). However it was noted that “erythema” in head, upper limbs and lower limbs was in less agreement with ICC when compared to other parameters, yet excellent. Mean PASI score was 10.96, 10.78 and 10.47 among observer 1, 2 and 3 respectively. Conclusion: Our study concludes that PASI is a reproducible and reliable clinical tool with less inter-observer variation if done by trained qualified observers to assess the severity of chronic plaque type psoriasis although its application gets tedious and difficult in busy dermatology clinics. Limitation: A small sample size.