4.1 Article

Relationship between PASI and FDLQI in paediatric psoriasis, and treatments used in daily clinical practice

期刊

AUSTRALASIAN JOURNAL OF DERMATOLOGY
卷 62, 期 2, 页码 190-194

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ajd.13536

关键词

FDLQI; paediatric; PASI; psoriasis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the impact of pediatric psoriasis on family quality of life, finding a strong correlation between disease severity and adverse quality of life for family members. Most patients showed improvement through topical therapy.
Background/Objectives: Psoriasis is a chronic, inflammatory skin disease that affects 0.71% of children. Skin diseases can have a significant impact on quality of life not only for the children affected by psoriasis, but also for their parents and carers. This study aimed to achieve more insight into the quality of life (QOL) of family of paediatric patients with psoriasis, and to investigate whether disease severity scores correlate with Family Dermatology Life Quality Index (FDLQI) scores. In addition, we also observed the treatments used to treat paediatric psoriasis in daily clinical practice. Methods: Patients with paediatric psoriasis aged 16 and under who visited our outpatient department were included. Baseline Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) and FDLQI were measured and analysed. Results: Of 157 patients were included in the study. Median PASI was 4.2 (IQR 2.6-6.9), and the median FDLQI was 12 (IQR 7-17). The correlation coefficient between PASI and FDLQI was 0.44 (P < 0.001). Burden of care was the highest scoring item on the FDLQI, followed by emotional impact. 146 patients were treated with topical therapy with a mean improvement in PASI of 3.92. 19 patients underwent phototherapy, and 19 underwent systemic therapy. Conclusions: In this largest study to date studying the impact of PASI on FDLQI, disease severity was found to be strongly associated with adverse quality of life of family members of paediatric psoriasis patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据