4.6 Article

A cross-sectional study using the Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) in childhood psoriasis: negative effect on quality of life and moderate correlation of CDLQI with severity scores

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY
Volume 163, Issue 5, Pages 1099-1101

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2010.09993.x

Keywords

children; Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index; juvenile psoriasis; Physician Global Assessment; Psoriasis Area and Severity Index; quality of life

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Juvenile psoriasis is a chronic and incurable skin disease that affects approximately 0.7% of children. Objectives To achieve more insight into the quality of life (QoL) in childhood psoriasis and to investigate whether disease severity scores correlate with QoL scores. Methods All consecutive patients with juvenile plaque psoriasis (<= 18 years old) who visited our outpatient department were included. At baseline, the Children's Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI) questionnaire was completed and disease severity was assessed by the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) and the Physician Global Assessment (PGA). Results Thirty-nine patients were included in the study. A median CDLQI of 6 [interquartile range (IQR) 5-9] was reported. Median PASI was 6.3 (IQR 3.3-8.2) and median PGA was 2 (IQR 1-3). The correlation coefficient between PASI and CDLQI was 0.47 (P = 0.003), whereas the correlation coefficient between PGA and CDLQI was 0.51 (P = 0.001). Conclusions The negative effect on QoL in juvenile psoriasis was confirmed in the largest cohort presented up to now. The correlation between disease severity scores and disease-related QoL in children with psoriasis is only moderate. Therefore, both clinical outcome parameters (PASI, PGA) and measures of QoL (CDLQI) should be included in adequate, patient-oriented clinical decision making.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available