Measuring disease in dermatology: studies of objective and subjective methods
Item Status
Embargo End Date
Date
Authors
Abstract
Itch lies second only to disturbance of body image as a reported symptom in dermatology.
This study started by concentrating on improving the measurement of itch. Itch has a paired
physical response, scratch. The pairing can be exploited: preliminary work by this unit had
validated the use of wrist-worn movement-measuring machines called ‘accelerometers’ to
measure itch-related movement (scratch and rub). The first part of this research developed
use of these machines. Simple accelerometers (‘Actiwatch Plus’) were used to observe the
pattern of variation of itch over clusters of nights and in different conditions. The
accelerometer scores were able to identify controls’ scores from those with itchy disease.
Considerable variation (56%) was discovered in objective score between subject and
considerable variation was noted (46%) even within subject. More complex accelerometers,
(‘DigiTrac’) which could potentially specifically identify itch-related movement on the basis
of frequency of action derived from Fast Fourier Transform (FFT), were validated against
the ‘gold standard’ measurement of itch-related movement, directly observed movement (via
infra red video recording). It was necessary to characterise the ‘frequency of action’ of itch
on video and, as an aside, the characteristics of human itch-related movement were
compared to other mammals’ itch-related movement ‘frequency of action’. The ‘frequency
of action’ and video data was used to enrich the DigiTrac readouts to improve specificity of
itch-related movement detection.
During the accelerometer studies, an unexpected finding came to light: objective score of
itch was not related to subjective score. To try to explain the lack of relationship, a 42 day
longitudinal study of atopic dermatitis patients’ subjective and objective scores was
undertaken. The results demonstrated autocorrelation for subjective scores, but not for the
objective scores but still did not fully explain the lack of relationship.
In an effort to explain the disconnect between subjective and objective scores a second
tranche of experiments and the second part of this research interrogated whether the methods
with which we measure disease as a whole in dermatology are robust. One study
investigated whether the way patients are asked about subjective symptoms in general was
resistant to the effects of focusing and framing bias. The results were reassuring as they
suggested that the commonly used and recommended symptom scoring systems were robust
in the face of bias. In order to assess whether perspective or perception of disease explained
the disconnect, a study was designed in collaboration with the Edinburgh College of Art. A
series of computer-generated images of different psoriasis severities were created and used
to assess how doctors and patients assessed disease-extent. This study showed that, whilst
each group had a naturally divergent opinion of extent of disease, by scoring disease using
the models it was possible to unify the perspective and perception of extent. Finally, an
exploratory study to reduce recall bias to a minimum, in case this had caused the disconnect
between objective and subjective, was undertaken. This employed a novel questionnaire, the
Day Reconstruction Method.
This item appears in the following Collection(s)

