			Home About us Contact

Patient-Reported Outcomes (Patient-Report + outcome)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Medical Sciences	100%

Selected Abstracts

Botulinum Toxin Type A Treatment of Multiple Upper Facial Sites: Patient-Reported Outcomes

DERMATOLOGIC SURGERY, Issue 2007
JEAN CARRUTHERS MD
BACKGROUND Aesthetic treatment planning must address subjects' goals and include subject-reported outcomes. OBJECTIVE The objective was to compare the effect of botulinum neurotoxin type A (BoNTA) with placebo on subject-reported outcomes and to assess the utility of 64 U of BoNTA to treat the entire upper face. METHODS Forty female subjects were randomized to receive 64 U of BoNTA or identical placebo injections (double-masked) divided among 16 sites of the upper face and were followed for 12 weeks. Subjects unimproved at Week 4 were eligible for open-label BoNTA treatment and were followed through Week 16. Main outcome measures were scores on seven items of the Facial Line Outcomes Questionnaire (FLO-7) and results on the Self-Perception of Age (SPA) for assessing age of appearance relative to actual age. RESULTS BoNTA treatment resulted in significant improvements on the FLO-7 scores that were maintained throughout the study. BoNTA treatment also reduced age of appearance in a majority of subjects. Placebo had no effects on any measure. No serious adverse events occurred. CONCLUSION Sixty-four-unit BoNTA treatment of upper facial rhytids safely and significantly improves subject-reported outcomes, as measured by the FLO-7 and SPA, and results in a younger, more satisfying, relaxed appearance. [source]

Specific recommendations for PROs and HRQoL assessment in allergic rhinitis and/or asthma: a GA2LEN taskforce position paper

ALLERGY, Issue 8 2010
F. Braido
To cite this article: Braido F, Bousquet PJ, Brzoza Z, Canonica GW, Compalati E, Fiocchi A, Fokkens W, Gerth van Wijk R, La Grutta S, Lombardi C, Maurer M, Pinto AM, Ridolo E, Senna GE, Terreehorst I, Todo Bom A, Bousquet J, Zuberbier T, Baiardini I. Specific recommendations for PROs and HRQoL assessment in allergic rhinitis and/or asthma: a GA2LEN taskforce position paper. Allergy 2010; 65: 959,968. Abstract The GA2LEN taskforce on Patient-Reported Outcomes (PROs) and Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) published in 2009 a position paper concerning PROS and HRQoL assessment in clinical trials on allergy. Because of the specificity of this topic in asthma and rhinitis, specific recommendations are needed. The aim of this position paper is to define PROs and their meaning in asthma and rhinitis research, explore the available tools to provide criteria for a proper choice, identify patient-related factor which could influence PROs assessment, define specific recommendations for assessment, analysis and results spreading, underline the unexplored areas and unmet needs. PROs assessment is gaining increasing importance, and it must be performed with a rigorous methodological procedure and using validated tools. This approach enables to better understand patient-related factors influencing clinical trials and real-life management outcomes, identify patients subgroups that can benefit from specific treatment and management plan and tailor treatment to address PROs (not only physician-defined targets) to improve asthma and rhinitis management. [source]

Recommendations for assessing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Health-Related quality of life in clinical trials on allergy: a GA2LEN taskforce position paper

ALLERGY, Issue 3 2010
I. Baiardini
To cite this article: Baiardini I, Bousquet PJ, Brzoza Z, Canonica GW, Compalati E, Fiocchi A, Fokkens W, van Wijk RG, La Grutta S, Lombardi C, Maurer M, Pinto AM, Ridolo E, Senna GE, Terreehorst I, Todo Bom A, Bousquet J, Zuberbier T, Braido F. Recommendations for assessing Patient-Reported Outcomes and Health-Related quality of life in clinical trials on allergy: a GA2LEN taskforce position paper. Allergy 2010; 65: 290,295. Abstract The aim of this Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA2LEN) consensus report is to provide recommendations for patient-reported outcomes (PROs) evaluation in clinical trials for allergic diseases, which constitute a global health problem in terms of physical, psychological economic and social impact. During the last 40 years, PROs have gained large consideration and use in the scientific community, to gain a better understanding of patients' subjective assessment with respect to elements concerning their health condition. They include all health-related reports coming from the patient, without involvement or interpretation by physician or others. PROs assessment should be performed by validated tools (disease-specific tools when available or generic ones) selected taking into account the aim of the study, the expected intervention effects and the determinant and confounding factors or patient-related factors which could influence PROs. Moreover, each tool should be used exclusively in the patient population following the authors' indications without modification and performing a cross-cultural validation if the tool must be used in a language that differs from the original. The result analysis also suggests that the relevance of PROs results in any interventional study should include a pre,post assessment providing information concerning statistical differences within or among groups, rates of response for the PROs and a minimal important difference for the population. The report underlines the importance of further investigation on some topics, such as the quality assessment of existing PROs tools, the definition of inclusion and exclusion criteria and a more extensive evaluation of the correlation between PROs, besides health-related quality of life, and clinical data. [source]