Importance: The variation in both clinical appearance and responses to diverse treatment options emphasize the importance of an accurate, clinically relevant, yet easy-to-use scoring system in hidradenitis suppurativa. Objective: To propose and provide validation data for the newly designed Severity Assessment of Hidradenitis Suppurativa score. Design, Setting, and Participants: We prospectively assessed disease severity using Hurley staging and the modified Hidradenitis Suppurativa Score in 355 patients referred to Ruhr-University Bochum Department of Dermatology between March 2016 and June 2017. We also assessed disease severity via the Severity Assessment of Hidradenitis Suppurativa score. Main Outcomes and Measures: Evaluation and assessment of convergent validity and responsiveness to treatment of the Severity Assessment of Hidradenitis Suppurativa score. Results: Eighty-eight of the 355 patients (134 [37.7%] men and 221 [62.3%] women with a median [IQR] age of 40 [30-49] years) were classified as Hurley stage I, 221 were Hurley stage II, and 46 were Hurley stage III, with an overall median modified Hidradenitis Suppurativa Score of 31 (interquartile range [IQR], 19.3-53). The median total Severity Assessment of Hidradenitis Suppurativa score was 6 (IQR, 4-9), significantly different among the 3 Hurley groups. The median SAHS score for patients in Hurley stage I was 5 (IQR, 3-6), 6 (IQR, 5-9) for patients in Hurley stage II, and 9 (IQR, 7-12) for patients in Hurley stage III (P < .001, Kruskal-Wallis test). Correlation analysis showed a significant correlation between the modified Hidradenitis Suppurativa Score and the Severity Assessment of Hidradenitis Suppurativa score (r = 0.79, P < .001). Disease severity assessment before and after 3 months of conservative systemic treatment showed a significant correlation between the Severity Assessment of Hidradenitis Suppurativa score and modified Hidradenitis Suppurativa Score. Both the mHSS (P = .001) and the SAHS score (P < .001) significantly differed between the baseline visit (median mHSS, 33 [IQR, 24-52]; median SAHS score, 6 [IQR, 5-9]) and the 3-month visit (median mHSS, 28 [IQR, 15-43.5]; median SAHS score, 5 [IQR, 4-6.3]). The 2 patient-reported items demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability with intraclass correlation coefficient values greater than 0.8. Conclusions and Relevance: Our validation data demonstrated that the Severity Assessment of Hidradenitis Suppurativa score is a disease severity instrument that significantly correlates with Hurley staging and the modified Hidradenitis Suppurativa Score, and is responsive enough to measure treatment outcome.
Importance: The variation in both clinical appearance and responses to diverse treatment options emphasize the importance of an accurate, clinically relevant, yet easy-to-use scoring system in hidradenitis suppurativa. Objective: To propose and provide validation data for the newly designed Severity Assessment of Hidradenitis Suppurativa score. Design, Setting, and Participants: We prospectively assessed disease severity using Hurley staging and the modified Hidradenitis Suppurativa Score in 355 patients referred to Ruhr-University Bochum Department of Dermatology between March 2016 and June 2017. We also assessed disease severity via the Severity Assessment of Hidradenitis Suppurativa score. Main Outcomes and Measures: Evaluation and assessment of convergent validity and responsiveness to treatment of the Severity Assessment of Hidradenitis Suppurativa score. Results: Eighty-eight of the 355 patients (134 [37.7%] men and 221 [62.3%] women with a median [IQR] age of 40 [30-49] years) were classified as Hurley stage I, 221 were Hurley stage II, and 46 were Hurley stage III, with an overall median modified Hidradenitis Suppurativa Score of 31 (interquartile range [IQR], 19.3-53). The median total Severity Assessment of Hidradenitis Suppurativa score was 6 (IQR, 4-9), significantly different among the 3 Hurley groups. The median SAHS score for patients in Hurley stage I was 5 (IQR, 3-6), 6 (IQR, 5-9) for patients in Hurley stage II, and 9 (IQR, 7-12) for patients in Hurley stage III (P < .001, Kruskal-Wallis test). Correlation analysis showed a significant correlation between the modified Hidradenitis Suppurativa Score and the Severity Assessment of Hidradenitis Suppurativa score (r = 0.79, P < .001). Disease severity assessment before and after 3 months of conservative systemic treatment showed a significant correlation between the Severity Assessment of Hidradenitis Suppurativa score and modified Hidradenitis Suppurativa Score. Both the mHSS (P = .001) and the SAHS score (P < .001) significantly differed between the baseline visit (median mHSS, 33 [IQR, 24-52]; median SAHS score, 6 [IQR, 5-9]) and the 3-month visit (median mHSS, 28 [IQR, 15-43.5]; median SAHS score, 5 [IQR, 4-6.3]). The 2 patient-reported items demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability with intraclass correlation coefficient values greater than 0.8. Conclusions and Relevance: Our validation data demonstrated that the Severity Assessment of Hidradenitis Suppurativa score is a disease severity instrument that significantly correlates with Hurley staging and the modified Hidradenitis Suppurativa Score, and is responsive enough to measure treatment outcome.
Authors: C C Zouboulis; T Tzellos; A Kyrgidis; G B E Jemec; F G Bechara; E J Giamarellos-Bourboulis; J R Ingram; T Kanni; I Karagiannidis; A Martorell; Ł Matusiak; A Pinter; E P Prens; D Presser; S Schneider-Burrus; E von Stebut; J C Szepietowski; H H van der Zee; S M Wilden; R Sabat Journal: Br J Dermatol Date: 2017-10-30 Impact factor: 9.302
Authors: Dan Turner; Holger J Schünemann; Lauren E Griffith; Dorcas E Beaton; Anne M Griffiths; Jeffrey N Critch; Gordon H Guyatt Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2009-10-01 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Dan Lipsker; François Severac; Marie Freysz; Eric Sauleau; Jurr Boer; Lennart Emtestam; Łukasz Matusiak; Errol Prens; Charles Velter; Cédric Lenormand; Nicolas Meyer; Gregor B E Jemec Journal: Dermatology Date: 2016-02-19 Impact factor: 5.366
Authors: Ledibabari M Ngaage; Yinglun Wu; Shealinna Ge; Selim Gebran; Fan Liang; Erin M Rada; Arthur J Nam; Ronald P Silverman; Yvonne M Rasko Journal: Int Wound J Date: 2019-11-03 Impact factor: 3.315
Authors: N Goldfarb; J R Ingram; G B E Jemec; H B Naik; V Piguet; M J Hyde; R Freese; M A Lowes; A Alavi Journal: Br J Dermatol Date: 2019-09-17 Impact factor: 9.302
Authors: Samuel Der Sarkissian; Schapoor Hessam; Joslyn S Kirby; Michelle A Lowes; Dillon Mintoff; Haley B Naik; Hans Christian Ring; Nisha Suyien Chandran; John W Frew Journal: JAMA Dermatol Date: 2022-03-01 Impact factor: 11.816
Authors: Andreas Pinter; Georgios Kokolakis; Juergen Rech; Mona H C Biermann; Benjamin M Häberle; Jan Multmeier; Maximilian Reinhardt Journal: Dermatol Ther (Heidelb) Date: 2020-06-04
Authors: A V Marzano; A Chiricozzi; G Giovanardi; G Argenziano; V Bettoli; L Bianchi; P Dapavo; V Dini; G Fabbrocini; G Micali; A M Offidani; C Potenza; F Prignano; G Gualberti; V Saragaglia; F Rongioletti Journal: J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol Date: 2020-05-12 Impact factor: 6.166