Table 3.
Assessment of patient-reported outcomes at baseline
| Analysis set N = 1500 |
|
|---|---|
| Patients, n (%) | 1500 (100.0) |
| POEM score, median (min, max) | 10.0 (3.0, 28.0) |
| POEM severity classification, n (%) | |
| Mild | 517 (34.5) |
| Moderate | 656 (43.7) |
| Severe | 246 (16.4) |
| Very severe | 81 (5.4) |
| PP-NRS score, median (min, max) | 4.0 (0.0, 10.0) |
| PP-NRS severity classification, n (%) | |
| No itch | 24 (1.6) |
| Mild itch | 696 (46.4) |
| Moderate itch | 487 (32.5) |
| Severe itch | 251 (16.7) |
| Very severe itch | 42 (2.8) |
| Treatment satisfaction | |
| PGIC classification, n (%) | |
| Very much improved | 94 (6.3) |
| Much improved | 460 (30.7) |
| Minimally improved | 630 (42.0) |
| No change | 280 (18.7) |
| Minimally worse | 22 (1.5) |
| Much worse | 10 (0.7) |
| Very much worse | 4 (0.3) |
| PGIT classification, n (%) | |
| Extremely satisfied | 22 (1.5) |
| Very satisfied | 114 (7.6) |
| Slightly satisfied | 341 (22.7) |
| Neither dissatisfied nor satisfied | 502 (33.5) |
| Slightly dissatisfied | 389 (25.9) |
| Very dissatisfied | 107 (7.1) |
| Extremely dissatisfied | 25 (1.7) |
| TSQM, mean (SD) | |
| Effectiveness | 51.1 (15.4) |
| Convenience | 58.3 (15.7) |
| Global satisfaction | 53.1 (15.8) |
| Medication adherence | |
| MMAS-8 score, median (min, max) | 3.5 (0.0, 8.0) |
| MMAS-8 classification, n (%) | 1500 (100.0) |
| Low adherence | 1249 (83.3) |
| Medium adherence | 212 (14.1) |
| High adherence | 39 (2.6) |
| Atopic dermatitis control | |
| ADCT score, median (min, max) | 7.0 (0.0, 24.0) |
| ADCT classification, n (%) | 1500 (100.0) |
| Good control | 396 (26.4) |
| Poor control | 1104 (73.6) |
No. of patients (%) is shown, unless otherwise specified
ADCT Atopic Dermatitis Control Tool, MMAS-8 Morisky Medication Adherence Scale-8, PP-NRS Peak Pruritus Numerical Rating Scale, PGIC Patient’s Global Impression of Change, PGIT Patient’s Global Impression of Treatment, POEM Patient Oriented Eczema Measure, TSQM Treatment Satisfaction with Current Medication