scholarly journals Content validity of a sleep numerical rating scale and a sleep diary in adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe atopic dermatitis

Author(s):  
Carla Dias-Barbosa ◽  
Rodolfo Matos ◽  
Margaret Vernon ◽  
Colleen E. Carney ◽  
Andrew Krystal ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The intense itching associated with atopic dermatitis (AD) often causes patients to experience severe sleep disturbance. Here, we describe the results of a two-phase concept elicitation and cognitive interview study to establish the content validity of a sleep disturbance numerical rating scale (SD NRS) and a Consensus Sleep Diary adapted for adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD (CSD-AD©). Results In phase I, a concept elicitation conducted in 20 adults and 10 adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD revealed that the following sleep-related issues were important and relevant: nighttime awakening (87%), trouble falling asleep (73%), feeling unrested (53%), daytime fatigue or sleepiness (53%), and feeling as if they did not get enough sleep (33%). The frequency and extent of sleep disturbance varied substantially from day to day due to varying degrees of itching and flares, medication use, and changes in the weather. All participants understood the SD NRS question, with most finding it easy or very easy to understand (100% of adults and 90% of adolescents) and most understanding the anchors as intended (95% of adults, and 100% of adolescents). Most participants (94% of adults, and 90% of adolescents) indicated that they would consider a one- or two-point change meaningful on the SD NRS. The CSD-AD© was revised based on participant feedback, and tested during phase II in a convenience sample of six adults and four adolescents from phase I. The changes made to the CSD-AD© were confirmed to be relevant and understandable. All patients were able to provide an answer to each item in the CSD-AD©, and most were able to estimate the duration of nighttime awakenings, daytime naps, and dozing. Conclusions The study supported the content validity of the SD NRS and CSD-AD© in adults and adolescents with moderate-to-severe AD. It also emphasized the importance of using these instruments daily when assessing the benefit of a new treatment on sleep quality in this population.

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Carla Dias-Barbosa ◽  
Rodolfo Matos ◽  
Margaret Vernon ◽  
Colleen E. Carney ◽  
Andrew Krystal ◽  
...  

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.


2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret K. Vernon ◽  
Laura L. Swett ◽  
Rebecca M. Speck ◽  
Catherine Munera ◽  
Robert H. Spencer ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Chronic kidney disease-associated pruritus (CKD-aP) is characterized by persistent itch that often leads to substantially impaired quality of life. The Worst Itching Intensity Numerical Rating Scale (WI-NRS) is a single-item patient-reported outcome measure in which patients indicate the intensity of the worst itching they experienced over the past 24 h. Here, we evaluated the content validity and psychometric properties of the WI-NRS and confirmed the threshold of meaningful change in hemodialysis patients with moderate-to-severe CKD-aP. Methods Content validity interviews were conducted in 23 patients. Psychometric properties of the WI-NRS were assessed using data from one phase 2 (N = 174) and two phase 3 (N = 848) clinical trials investigating an anti-pruritic treatment. Anchor-based methods were used to confirm meaningful within-patient change score thresholds in the phase 3 trial patients and mixed-method exit interviews (N = 70) contributed further insight. Results Content validity interviews indicated patients considered the WI-NRS to be straightforward, comprehensive, and relevant. Test–retest reliability was strong in both trial cohorts (intraclass correlation coefficients > 0.75). Construct validity analyses indicated high correlation between the WI-NRS and other measures of itch. Anchor-based analyses showed a reduction of ≥ 3 points from baseline score represented an appropriate clinically meaningful within-patient change on the WI-NRS. In the exit interviews, all patients with a reduction ≥ 3 points considered the change meaningful. Conclusions The WI-NRS is a reliable, valid, and responsive measure of itch intensity for patients with moderate-to-severe CKD-aP. These results support its use to assess treatment efficacy and in clinical evaluation and management of pruritus in hemodialysis patients.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 279
Author(s):  
Matthew T Reynolds ◽  
Scott M Dinehart ◽  
Katlyn R Anderson ◽  
Joe Gorelick

Objectives: Prurigo nodularis (PN) is a disease of aberrant and recalcitrant itching which is difficult to effectively manage. There are no current FDA-approved therapies for PN.  The current topical and systemic medications used for this condition provide less than optimal efficacy for the majority of patients with this condition and often have unacceptable side effects.  We report 4 patients who were effectively treated with dupilumab (Dupixent) for the treatment of recalcitrant PN.Methods:  Four patients were treated successfully with dupilumab, a systemic biologic agent that is not immunosuppressive (Dupixent; Sanofi-Regeneron). Patients were treated with dupilumab monotherapy, without the use of other systemic immunosuppressing agents. The peak pruritus numerical rating scale (NRSi) was used to evaluate patients at weeks 0 and 4. Results: Dupilumab therapy results in a dramatic reduction in NRSi scores by week 4 and that result continues throughout the duration of therapy. This reduction in itch is seen with continuous therapy.Conclusion: Dupilumab therapy appears effective in reducing the overall itch severity in patients with PN. The usage of dupilumab as a monotherapy shows promise in the treatment of PN. The therapeutic response to dupilumab seen in PN suggests that the pathogenesis of PN may overlap with that of atopic dermatitis. 


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-21
Author(s):  
Mani Mofidi ◽  
Ali Dashti ◽  
Mahdi Rezai ◽  
Niloufar Ghodrati ◽  
Hoorolnesa Ameli ◽  
...  

Introduction: This study was designed to compare the effectiveness of intravenous morphine with nebulized morphine in pain relief of patients referring to the emergency setting with traumatic musculoskeletal pain. Methods: This randomized, placebo-controlled and double-blind clinical study evaluated 160 patients 18 to 65 years of age with acute traumatic pain, who attended the emergency department during 2019. Subjects were assessed with Numerical Rating Scale based on inclusion and exclusion criteria and randomly divided into two groups. In one group, 80 patients received IV morphine (0.1 mg/kg+5 mL normal saline) plus an equivalent volume of IV placebo. In the second group, 80 patients received nebulized morphine (0.2 mg/kg+5 mL normal saline) plus nebulized placebo. Pain score was monitored in all patients with Numerical Rating Scale before and after intervention at baseline, 15, 30, 45, and 60-minute intervals. Patients’ vital signs and possible adverse events were evaluated in each observation time points. Finally, all participants were assessed for their satisfaction with pain management. Data were analyzed using repeated measure analysis for continuous variables and Binomial test for categorical variables Results: There was no significant difference between the demographic characteristics of patients in study groups. Pain relief between the two groups was similar during the observation (0, 15, 30, 45, 60 min) (P>0.05). There were no changes in vital signs between two groups, although the nebulized group had lower systolic blood pressure at the time-point of 15 minutes after the treatment initiation (P=0.03). Conclusion: Although Nebulized morphine has similar efficacy in comparison with IV route, nebulization might be considered as the clinically efficacious route of morphine administration with minimal side effects, providing optimal pain relief in patients.


2020 ◽  
Vol 103 (10) ◽  
pp. 1028-1035

Background: Craniotomy causes acute and chronic pain. Uncontrolled postoperative pain may lead to adverse events. Perioperative scalp nerves block is not only effective in reducing intraoperative hemodynamic response, but it also reduces postoperative pain and postoperative analgesia requirement. Objective: To compare the benefits of adding dexmedetomidine to levobupivacaine in scalp nerves block before craniotomy for the duration of analgesia in supratentorial craniotomy. Materials and Methods: After approval by the Committee for Research, 50 supratentorial craniotomy patients were randomized into two groups. The control group received 30 mL scalp nerves block with 0.25% levobupivacaine with adrenaline 1:200,000, whereas the study group received 30 mL scalp nerves block with 0.25% levobupivacaine with adrenaline 1:200,000 plus dexmedetomidine 1 mcg/kg. The primary outcome was the time to first analgesic requirement postoperatively. The secondary outcomes included intraoperative fentanyl consumption, verbal numerical rating scale, tramadol consumption, and complications during the first 24 hours postoperatively. Results: Patients in the study group had significantly increase time to the first analgesic requirement in postoperative period and reduced intraoperative fentanyl consumption. The median time to first analgesic requirement was 555 (360 to 1,035) minutes in the study group versus 405 (300 to 520) minutes in the control group (p=0.023). Intraoperative fentanyl consumption 125 (75 to 175) mcg in the study group was significantly lower than 200 (150 to 250) mcg in the control group (p=0.02). The verbal numerical rating scale at 1, 4, 8, 12 and 24 hours postoperatively, tramadol consumption, and complications during the first 24 hours postoperatively were not statistically significant different. Conclusion: Preoperative scalp nerves block with 0.25% levobupivacaine with adrenaline (1:200,000) with dexmedetomidine 1 mcg/kg significantly increased the time to first analgesic requirement and reduced intraoperative fentanyl consumption compared to 0.25% levobupivacaine with adrenaline (1:200,000) without perioperative complications. Keywords: Scalp block, Dexmedetomidine, Post-craniotomy analgesia, Supratentorial tumor, Levobupivacaine


Rheumatology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 60 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Helena Marzo-Ortega ◽  
Chiara Perella ◽  
Denis Poddubnyy ◽  
Effie Pournara ◽  
Agnieszka Zielińska ◽  
...  

Abstract Background/Aims  SKIPPAIN (NCT03136861) is the first randomised controlled study involving a biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug, with a primary endpoint of spinal pain at Week 8 in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA; ankylosing spondylitis [AS] and non-radiographic [nr]-axSpA). We present the 24-week results of secukinumab in reducing spinal pain and disease activity following step-up dosing. Methods  This double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 3b study enrolled patients (aged ≥18 years) with active disease (BASDAI ≥4; average spinal pain numerical rating scale [NRS] score >4 at baseline; inadequate response to ≥ 2 non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs ≥4 weeks). Patients were randomised (3:1) to subcutaneous secukinumab 150 mg or placebo weekly followed by every 4 weeks (Q4W) from Week 4. At Week 8, placebo patients were re-randomised to secukinumab 150 or 300 mg Q4W. Patients originally randomised to secukinumab 150 mg were classified as responders or non-responders (spinal pain NRS score <4 or ≥ 4, respectively) at Week 8. Responders were re-assigned to continue doubleblind secukinumab 150 mg Q4W (Arm A1). Non-responders were re-randomised to double-blind secukinumab 150 mg (Arm A2) or a step-up dose of 300 mg (Arm A3) Q4W. Treatment was up to Week 24. Primary endpoint: proportion of patients achieving an average spinal pain score <4 on a 0-10 NRS with secukinumab vs placebo at Week 8. Results  380 axSpA patients (269/380 [70.8%] AS; 111/380 [29.2%] nr-axSpA) were randomised to secukinumab 150 mg (N = 285) or placebo (N = 95). The primary endpoint was met (proportion of spinal pain NRS [average] score responders: 32% vs 20%; odds ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.9 [1.1-3.3] favouring secukinumab vs placebo; P < 0.05). Further reductions in spinal pain occurred at Week 24, especially in those initially randomised to placebo and switched to active drug. Pronounced improvements were observed in other disease activity measurements (Table 1). Numerically, more patients achieved ASDAS low disease activity at Week 24 post-secukinumab dose escalation (Arm A3) vs those remaining on the same dose (Arm A2). Conclusion  Secukinumab provided rapid, significant improvement in spinal pain and led to low disease activity in axSpA patients. Secukinumab dose escalation might be beneficial for patients not responding fully to the starting dose. P188 Table 1:Spinal pain and ASDAS-CRP scores at Weeks 8 and 24Week 8SEC 150 mg (N = 285)PBO (N = 95)Change from baseline in spinal pain NRS score (total), mean (SD) [n]-2.6 (2.5) [279]-1.5 (2.2) [92]Change from baseline in ASDAS-CRP score, mean (SD) [n]-1.2 (1.0) [271]-0.5 (0.8) [89]Week 24Active treatment group (SEC treatment starting at baseline)PBO switchers group (SEC treatment starting at Week 8)Arm A1 (SEC 150 R-150) N = 90Arm A2 (SEC 150 NR-150) N = 94Arm A3 (SEC 150 NR-300) N = 94Arm B1 (PBO-SEC 150) N = 45Arm B2 (PBO-SEC 300) N = 44Change from Week 8 in spinal pain NRS score (total), mean (SD) [n]-0.4 (1.5) [88]-2.1 (2.2) [93]-1.9 (2.2) [91]-2.5 (2.6) [45]-2.9 (2.6) [43]Change from baseline in ASDAS-CRP score, mean (SD) [n]-2.2 (1.0) [86]-1.2 (1.0) [93]-1.5 (1.0) [92]-1.5 (1.1) [44]-1.8 (0.9) [43]Arm A1=SEC responder to SEC 150 mg at Week 8 (SEC 150 R-150); Arm A2=SEC non-responder to SEC 150 mg at Week 8 (SEC 150 NR-150); Arm A3=SEC non-responder to SEC 300 mg at Week 8 (SEC 150 NR-300); Arm B1=Placebo patients to SEC 150 mg (PBO-SEC 150); Arm B2=Placebo patients to SEC 300 mg (PBO-SEC 300). ASDAS-CRP, Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score using C-reactive protein; N, total number of patients randomised; n, number of evaluable patients; NR, non-responders; NRS, numerical rating scale; PBO, placebo; R, responders; SD, standard deviation; SEC, secukinumab. Disclosure  H. Marzo-Ortega: Consultancies; AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB. Member of speakers’ bureau; AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda, UCB. Grants/research support; Janssen, Novartis. C. Perella: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. Shareholder/stock ownership; Novartis Stock. D. Poddubnyy: Consultancies; Consultant/speaker for: AbbVie, BMS, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB. Grants/research support; AbbVie, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer. E. Pournara: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. Shareholder/stock ownership; Novartis Stock. A. Zielińska: Consultancies; Novartis, Pfizer. A. Baranauskaite: Consultancies; AbbVie. Member of speakers’ bureau; Novartis, AbbVie, Amgen, Roche, KRKA. S. Sadhu: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. B. Schulz: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. M. Rissler: Corporate appointments; Employee of Novartis. Shareholder/stock ownership; Novartis Stock.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document