journal article Open Access Mar 01, 2021

Patient-reported outcome measures for acne: a mixed-methods validation study (acne PROMs)

BMJ Open Vol. 11 No. 3 pp. e034047 · BMJ
View at Publisher Save 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034047
Abstract
Objectives
To examine the acceptability and validity of two patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for adult acne, comparing them to the validated Acne-specific Quality of Life (Acne-QoL) measure.


Design
Mixed-methods validation study.


Setting
Participants were recruited by (1) mail-out through primary care if they had ever consulted for acne and received a prescription for acne treatment within the last 6 months, (2) opportunistically in secondary care and (3) poster advertisement in community venues.


Participants
221 (204 quantitative and 17 qualitative) participants with acne, aged 18–50 years.


Outcome measures
Quantitative sub-study participants completed Acne-QoL, Skindex-16 and Comprehensive Acne Quality of Life Scale (CompAQ) at baseline, 24 hours and 6 weeks. Qualitative sub-study participants took part in cognitive think-aloud interviews, while completing the same measures. Transcribed audio recordings were analysed using inductive thematic analysis.


Results
Quantitative analyses suggested high internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha 0.74–0.96) and reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient values 0.88–0.97) for both questionnaires. Both scales showed floor effects on some subdomains. Skindex-16 and CompAQ showed good evidence of construct validity when compared with Acne-QoL with Spearman’s correlation coefficients 0.54–0.81, and good repeatability over 24 hours.
Qualitative data uncovered wide-ranging views regarding usability and acceptability. Interviewees held strong but differing views about layout, question/response wording, redundant/similar questions and guidance notes. Similarly, interviewees differed in perceptions of acceptability of the different scales, particularly on relatability of questions and emotive reactions to scales.


Conclusions
All PROMs performed well in statistical analyses. No PROM showed superior usability and acceptability in the qualitative study. Any PROM should be acceptable for further research in adult acne but researchers should consider the different domains and whether they will measure only facial or facial and trunk acne before making a selection. A new PROM or further evaluation of novel PROMs may be beneficial.
Topics

No keywords indexed for this article. Browse by subject →

References
34
[2]
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Clinical Knowledge Summaries . Acne vulgaris, 2020. Available: https://cks.nice.org.uk/topics/acne-vulgaris/ [Accessed Sept 2020].
[3]
Purdy "Presentation and management of acne in primary care: a retrospective cohort study" Br J Gen Pract (2003)
[4]
Guidelines of care for the management of acne vulgaris

Andrea L. Zaenglein, Arun L. Pathy, Bethanee J. Schlosser et al.

Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology 2016 10.1016/j.jaad.2015.12.037
[5]
Nast "European evidence-based (S3) guidelines for the treatment of acne" J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol (2012) 10.1111/j.1468-3083.2011.04374.x
[7]
Barratt "Outcome measures in acne vulgaris: systematic review" Br J Dermatol (2009) 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2008.08819.x
[8]
Acne Core Outcomes Research Network . Welcome to ACORN. Available: https://sites.psu.edu/acnecoreoutcomes/ [Accessed 30 May 2019].
[9]
Layton "Identifying what to measure in acne clinical trials: first steps towards development of a core outcome set" J Invest Dermatol (2017) 10.1016/j.jid.2017.04.017
[10]
U.S Department of Health and Human Services . Food and drug administration. center for drug evaluation and research. acne vulgaris: Establilshing effectiveness of drugs intended for treatment. guidance for industry. Available: https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/acne-vulgaris-establishing-effectiveness-drugs-intended-treatment[Accessed 14 Aug 2019].
[11]
Ozolins "Randomised controlled multiple treatment comparison to provide a cost-effectiveness rationale for the selection of antimicrobial therapy in acne" Health Technol Assess (2005) 10.3310/hta9010
[12]
Agnew "A comprehensive critique and review of published measures of acne severity" J Clin Aesthet Dermatol (2016)
[13]
Tan "Development and validation of a comprehensive acne severity scale" J Cutan Med Surg (2007) 10.2310/7750.2007.00037
[18]
McLellan "Development of a comprehensive quality-of-life measure for facial and torso acne" J Cutan Med Surg (2018) 10.1177/1203475418756379
[19]
The Skindex Instruments to Measure the Effects of Skin Disease on Quality of Life

Mary-Margaret Chren

Dermatologic Clinics 2012 10.1016/j.det.2011.11.003
[22]
Van Den Haak "Evaluation of an informational web site: three variants of the think-aloud method compared" Technical Communication (2007)
[24]
Nunnally JC . Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1978.
[25]
Barrett "The observation to variable ratio in factor analysis" Personality Study & Group Behaviour (1981)
[27]
Mukaka "Statistics corner: a guide to appropriate use of correlation coefficient in medical research" Malawi Med J (2012)
[28]
Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate?

C. A. McHorney, A. R. Tarlov

Quality of Life Research 10.1007/bf01593882
[29]
Using thematic analysis in psychology

Virginia Braun, Victoria Clarke

Qualitative Research in Psychology 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
[31]
Layton "Prioritizing treatment outcomes: how people with acne vulgaris decide if their treatment is working" J Evid Based Med (2017) 10.1111/jebm.12249
[32]
INVOLVE . People in Research. Available: https://www.peopleinresearch.org/ [Accessed June 2017].
[33]
Klassen "Development of a new patient-reported outcome measure to evaluate treatments for acne and acne scarring: the ACNE-Q" Br J Dermatol (2019) 10.1111/bjd.18005
[34]
Zeichner "Emerging issues in adult female acne" J Clin Aesthet Dermatol (2017)
Metrics
9
Citations
34
References
Details
Published
Mar 01, 2021
Vol/Issue
11(3)
Pages
e034047
License
View
Funding
National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research Award: 369
Cite This Article
Samantha Hornsey, Beth Stuart, Ingrid Muller, et al. (2021). Patient-reported outcome measures for acne: a mixed-methods validation study (acne PROMs). BMJ Open, 11(3), e034047. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034047