S Ständer1, C Zeidler1, C Riepe1, S Steinke1, F Fritz2, P Bruland2, I Soto-Rey2, M Storck2, T Agner3, M Augustin4, C Blome4, F Dalgard5, A W M Evers6, S Garcovich7, M Gonçalo8, J Lambert9, F J Legat10, T Leslie11, L Misery12, U Raap13, A Reich14, E Şavk15, M Streit16, E Serra-Baldrich17, J Szepietowski14, J Wallengren18, E Weisshaar19, M Dugas2. 1. Department of Dermatology, Competence Center for Chronic Pruritus, University Hospital of Münster, Münster, Germany. 2. Institute of Medical Informatics, University of Münster, Münster, Germany. 3. Department of Dermatology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 4. Institute for Health Services Research in Dermatology and Nursing, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. 5. Department of Dermatology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. 6. Department of Health, Medical and Neuropsychology, Institute of Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands. 7. Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Milano, Lombardy, Italy. 8. Department of Dermatology, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal. 9. Department of Dermatology, University Hospital of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium. 10. Department of Dermatology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria. 11. Royal Free London and St John's Institute of Dermatology, Guy's & St Thomas' Hospital, London, United Kingdom. 12. Department of Dermatology, University Hospital of Brest, Brest, France. 13. Department of Dermatology and Allergy, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany. 14. Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Allergology, Wroclaw Medical University, Wroclaw, Poland. 15. Department of Dermatology, Adnan Menderes University, Aydın, Turkey. 16. Department of Dermatology, Kantonsspital Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland. 17. Cutaneous Allergy Unit, Department of Dermatology, Hospital Sant Pau, Universitat Autònoma Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 18. Department of Dermatology and Venereology, University Hospital of Lund, Lund, Sweden. 19. Department of Social Medicine, Occupational and Environmental Dermatology, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic pruritus is a frequently occurring symptom of various dermatoses that causes a high burden and impaired quality of life. An effective anti pruritic therapy is important for the patient, but its effectiveness is difficult to evaluate. Diverse methods and interpretations of pruritic metrics are utilized in clinical trials and the daily clinical practice in different countries, resulting in difficulties comparing collected data. METHODS: We founded a European Network on Assessment of Severity and Burden of Pruritus (PruNet) that is supported by the EADV. PruNet consists of 28 experts from 15 EU countries (21 dermatologists, 5 medical informaticists, 2 psychologists) and aims to unify the assessment of itch in routine dermatological care. Following a preliminary survey, a consensus conference was held in order to agree upon the prioritization of patient-reported outcome tools. RESULTS: Through utilizing the Delphi method, it was agreed that tools for measuring itch intensity (ex. the visual analogue scale) and quality of life (ex. ItchyQoL) are of primary importance and should urgently be foremost validated. CONCLUSION: The validation and harmonization of standards are needed for the improvement of quality care for patients suffering from pruritic dermatoses. This summer, the first validation studies in several EADV member countries already began.
BACKGROUND:Chronic pruritus is a frequently occurring symptom of various dermatoses that causes a high burden and impaired quality of life. An effective anti pruritic therapy is important for the patient, but its effectiveness is difficult to evaluate. Diverse methods and interpretations of pruritic metrics are utilized in clinical trials and the daily clinical practice in different countries, resulting in difficulties comparing collected data. METHODS: We founded a European Network on Assessment of Severity and Burden of Pruritus (PruNet) that is supported by the EADV. PruNet consists of 28 experts from 15 EU countries (21 dermatologists, 5 medical informaticists, 2 psychologists) and aims to unify the assessment of itch in routine dermatological care. Following a preliminary survey, a consensus conference was held in order to agree upon the prioritization of patient-reported outcome tools. RESULTS: Through utilizing the Delphi method, it was agreed that tools for measuring itch intensity (ex. the visual analogue scale) and quality of life (ex. ItchyQoL) are of primary importance and should urgently be foremost validated. CONCLUSION: The validation and harmonization of standards are needed for the improvement of quality care for patients suffering from pruritic dermatoses. This summer, the first validation studies in several EADV member countries already began.
Authors: Manuel P Pereira; Claudia Zeidler; Michael Storck; Konstantin Agelopoulos; Wolfgang G Philipp-Dormston; Alexander Zink; Sonja Ständer Journal: Acta Derm Venereol Date: 2020-01-07 Impact factor: 3.875