Patient prioritisation of items to develop the Patient‐Reported Impact of Dermatological Diseases measure: A global Delphi study

Background The Global Research on the Impact of Dermatological Diseases (GRIDD) project is developing the new Patient‐Reported Impact of Dermatological Diseases (PRIDD) measure. PRIDD measures the impact of dermatological conditions on the patient's life. Objectives This study aimed to seek con...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology 2024-07, Vol.38 (7), p.1391-1400
Main Authors: Trialonis‐Suthakharan, Nirohshah, Pattinson, Rachael, Tahmasebi Gandomkari, Nasim, Austin, Jennifer, Janus, Christine, Courtier, Nick, Hewitt, Rachael M., Bundy, Chris, Augustin, Matthias
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Aged
Consensus
Delphi Technique
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Patient Reported Outcome Measures
Psychometrics
Quality of Life
Skin Diseases
Surveys and Questionnaires
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background The Global Research on the Impact of Dermatological Diseases (GRIDD) project is developing the new Patient‐Reported Impact of Dermatological Diseases (PRIDD) measure. PRIDD measures the impact of dermatological conditions on the patient's life. Objectives This study aimed to seek consensus from patients on which items to prioritize for inclusion in PRIDD. Methods A modified, two‐round Delphi study was conducted. Adults (≥18 years) with dermatological conditions were recruited. The survey consisted of a demographic's questionnaire and 263 potential impact items in six languages. Quantitative data used Likert‐type ranking scales and analysed against consensus criteria. Qualitative data collected free text responses for additional feedback and a framework analysis was conducted. Results 1154 people representing 90 dermatological conditions from 66 countries participated. Items were either removed (n = 79), edited (n = 179) or added (n = 2), based on consensus thresholds and qualitative feedback. Results generated the first draft of PRIDD with 27 items across five impact domains. Conclusion This Delphi study resulted in the draft version of PRIDD, ready for psychometric testing. The triangulated data helped refine the existing conceptual framework of impact. PRIDD has since been pilot tested with patients and is currently undergoing psychometric testing.
ISSN:0926-9959
1468-3083
1468-3083
DOI:10.1111/jdv.19903