PSOdisk is a reliable, intuitive instrument for the evaluation of psychological distress, which strongly correlates with DLQI: a preliminary study
PSOdisk is a 10-item visual instrument, aimed at assessing the burden of disease in patients with psoriasis.
To compare PSOdisk with a scientifically validated questionnaire, the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI), and asses both tools in relation to Psoriasis Severity Index (PASI) and patient acceptance.
Materials & Methods
Fifty patients with cutaneous psoriasis and/or arthritic psoriasis were recruited. Correlation analysis between PSOdisk and DLQI was performed using Pearson’s product-moment correlation coefficient. A multivariate linear regression was carried out to investigate the effect of PASI on PSOdisk and DLQI scores. In addition, we evaluated completion times as well as patient satisfaction for both PSOdisk and DLQI.
PSOdisk and DLQI mean scores were 22.04 ± 20.56 and 3.35 ± 4.52, respectively. The mean value for PASI was 5.98 ± 5.89 and for age was 55.88 ± 14.09 years. The mean value of Cronbach’s coefficient alpha was 0.88 for PSOdisk and 0.90 for DLQI, suggesting good reliability. A significant correlation was found between PSOdisk and PASI, and a statistically significant correlation between DLQI and PASI. Multivariate linear regression analysis demonstrated a statistically significant effect of PASI on both the DLQI score and PSOdisk score.
PSOdisk demonstrates good correlation with DLQI and PASI, good patient satisfaction, and requires a short completion time.
Key wordsdaily clinical practice DLQI intuitive instrument PSOdisk psoriasis psychological distress
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 6.Nash AS, McAteer H, Schofield J, Penzer R, Gilbert AK. Psoriasis today:experiences of healthcare and impact on quality of life in a major UK cohort. Prim Health Care Res Dev 2014; 5: 1–9.Google Scholar
- 11.Iglewicz B, Hoaglin D. How to detect and handle outliers. In:Mykytka EF. The ASQC Basic References in Quality Control:Statistical Techniques. Milwaukee:ASQC Quality Press, 1993: 16.Google Scholar