Michael Hughes1, Andrew Tracey1, Monica Bhushan2, Kuntal Chakravarty3, Christopher P Denton3, Shirish Dubey4, Serena Guiducci5, Lindsay Muir6, Voon Ong3, Louise Parker3, John D Pauling7, Athiveeraramapandian Prabu8, Christine Rogers9, Christopher Roberts10, Ariane L Herrick1,11. 1. Centre for Musculoskeletal Research, The University of Manchester, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK. 2. Department of Dermatology, Blackpool Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Clifton Hospital, Lytham St Annes, UK. 3. Centre for Rheumatology and Connective Tissue Diseases, Royal Free Hospital, London, UK. 4. Department of Rheumatology, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UK. 5. Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy. 6. Department of Hand Surgery, Salford Royal NHS Foundation Trust, Salford, UK. 7. Department of Pharmacy & Pharmacology, University of Bath, Bath, UK. 8. Rheumatology Department, Birmingham City Hospital, Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust, Birmingham, UK. 9. The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. 10. Centre for Biostatistics, Institute of Population Health, School of Medicine, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. 11. NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Central Manchester NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The reliability of clinician grading of systemic sclerosis-related digital ulcers has been reported to be poor to moderate at best, which has important implications for clinical trial design. The aim of this study was to examine the reliability of new proposed UK Scleroderma Study Group digital ulcer definitions among UK clinicians with an interest in systemic sclerosis. METHODS: Raters graded (through a custom-built interface) 90 images (80 unique and 10 repeat) of a range of digital lesions collected from patients with systemic sclerosis. Lesions were graded on an ordinal scale of severity: 'no ulcer', 'healed ulcer' or 'digital ulcer'. RESULTS: A total of 23 clinicians - 18 rheumatologists, 3 dermatologists, 1 hand surgeon and 1 specialist rheumatology nurse - completed the study. A total of 2070 (1840 unique + 230 repeat) image gradings were obtained. For intra-rater reliability, across all images, the overall weighted kappa coefficient was high (0.71) and was moderate (0.55) when averaged across individual raters. Overall inter-rater reliability was poor (0.15). CONCLUSION: Although our proposed digital ulcer definitions had high intra-rater reliability, the overall inter-rater reliability was poor. Our study highlights the challenges of digital ulcer assessment by clinicians with an interest in systemic sclerosis and provides a number of useful insights for future clinical trial design. Further research is warranted to improve the reliability of digital ulcer definition/rating as an outcome measure in clinical trials, including examining the role for objective measurement techniques, and the development of digital ulcer patient-reported outcome measures.
INTRODUCTION: The reliability of clinician grading of systemic sclerosis-related digital ulcers has been reported to be poor to moderate at best, which has important implications for clinical trial design. The aim of this study was to examine the reliability of new proposed UK Scleroderma Study Group digital ulcer definitions among UK clinicians with an interest in systemic sclerosis. METHODS: Raters graded (through a custom-built interface) 90 images (80 unique and 10 repeat) of a range of digital lesions collected from patients with systemic sclerosis. Lesions were graded on an ordinal scale of severity: 'no ulcer', 'healed ulcer' or 'digital ulcer'. RESULTS: A total of 23 clinicians - 18 rheumatologists, 3 dermatologists, 1 hand surgeon and 1 specialist rheumatology nurse - completed the study. A total of 2070 (1840 unique + 230 repeat) image gradings were obtained. For intra-rater reliability, across all images, the overall weighted kappa coefficient was high (0.71) and was moderate (0.55) when averaged across individual raters. Overall inter-rater reliability was poor (0.15). CONCLUSION: Although our proposed digital ulcer definitions had high intra-rater reliability, the overall inter-rater reliability was poor. Our study highlights the challenges of digital ulcer assessment by clinicians with an interest in systemic sclerosis and provides a number of useful insights for future clinical trial design. Further research is warranted to improve the reliability of digital ulcer definition/rating as an outcome measure in clinical trials, including examining the role for objective measurement techniques, and the development of digital ulcer patient-reported outcome measures.
Entities:
Keywords:
Systemic sclerosis; clinical trials; digital ulcers; outcome measures; scleroderma
Authors: A E Gliddon; C J Doré; C M Black; N McHugh; R Moots; C P Denton; A Herrick; T Barnes; J Camilleri; K Chakravarty; P Emery; B Griffiths; N D Hopkinson; P Hickling; P Lanyon; C Laversuch; T Lawson; R Mallya; M Nisar; C Rhys-Dillon; T Sheeran; P J Maddison Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2007-11
Authors: Murray Baron; Lorinda Chung; Geneviève Gyger; Laura Hummers; Dinesh Khanna; Maureen D Mayes; Janet E Pope; Ami A Shah; Virginia D Steen; Russell Steele; Solène Tatibouet; Ariane Herrick; Ulf Müller-Ladner; Marie Hudson Journal: Clin Rheumatol Date: 2013-12-20 Impact factor: 2.980
Authors: Michael Hughes; Voon H Ong; Marina E Anderson; Frances Hall; Pia Moinzadeh; Bridget Griffiths; Eileen Baildam; Christopher P Denton; Ariane L Herrick Journal: Rheumatology (Oxford) Date: 2015-06-26 Impact factor: 7.580
Authors: F M Wigley; R A Wise; J R Seibold; D A McCloskey; G Kujala; T A Medsger; V D Steen; J Varga; S Jimenez; M Mayes; P J Clements; S R Weiner; J Porter; M Ellman; C Wise; L D Kaufman; J Williams; W Dole Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 1994-02-01 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Ariane L Herrick; Christopher Roberts; Andrew Tracey; Alan Silman; Marina Anderson; Mark Goodfield; Neil McHugh; Lindsay Muir; Christopher P Denton Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2009-03
Authors: Y A Suliman; C Bruni; S R Johnson; E Praino; M Alemam; N Borazan; L Cometi; B Meyers; D Khanna; Y Allanore; M Baron; T Krieg; A Herrick; A Afonso; O Distler; S Kafaja; C P Denton; M Matucci-Cerinic; D E Furst Journal: J Scleroderma Relat Disord Date: 2017-05-19
Authors: Marco Matucci-Cerinic; Thomas Krieg; Loic Guillevin; Barbara Schwierin; Daniel Rosenberg; Peter Cornelisse; Christopher P Denton Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2015-11-26 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: John D Pauling; Joana Caetano; Corrado Campochiaro; Giacomo De Luca; Ana Maria Gheorghiu; Maria Grazia Lazzaroni; Dinesh Khanna Journal: J Scleroderma Relat Disord Date: 2019-11-25
Authors: Anat Scheiman-Elazary; Veena K Ranganath; Ami Ben-Artzi; Suzanne Kafaja; Nabeel H Borazan; Thasia Woodworth; Lewei Duan; David Elashoff; Philip Clements; Daniel E Furst Journal: J Scleroderma Relat Disord Date: 2018-06-06
Authors: Michael Hughes; Begonya Alcacer-Pitarch; Ana Maria Gheorghiu; Emanuela Praino; Robert David Sandler; Yonit Tavor; Cosimo Bruni; Marco Matucci-Cerinic Journal: Clin Rheumatol Date: 2020-01-18 Impact factor: 2.980
Authors: Barbara Ruaro; Tania Santiago; Michael Hughes; Gemma Lepri; Gabriele Poillucci; Elisa Baratella; Francesco Salton; Marco Confalonieri Journal: Open Access Rheumatol Date: 2021-04-28