Patient-reported outcome measures in severe asthma: an expert consensus

Martínez-Moragón, Eva; Ercoreca, Ignacio Antepara; García, María Muñoz; Maldonado, Francisco Casas; Lamas, Marta Calvín; Vives, Eusebi Chiner; Diz, Carlos Crespo; Díaz-Pérez, David; Gracia, Ibon Eguiluz; Gil, Sara García; González-Pérez, Ruperto; Mena, Alicia Habernau; Valverde, Tamara Hermida; Montaña, Sònia Jornet; López-Carrasco, Valentín; López, Icíar Martínez; Merino-Bohórquez, Vicente; Moreno-Ancillo, Álvaro; Cabeza, Ana Cristina Mínguez; Monte-Boquet, Emilio; Revuelta-Herrero, Jose Luis; Sánchez-Cuellar, Silvia

doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.24904508.v1

ijas_a_2297372_sm2581.docx (84.21 kB)

Patient-reported outcome measures in severe asthma: an expert consensus

journal contribution

posted on 2023-12-26, 14:40 authored by Eva Martínez-Moragón, Ignacio Antepara Ercoreca, María Muñoz García, Francisco Casas Maldonado, Marta Calvín Lamas, Eusebi Chiner Vives, Carlos Crespo Diz, David Díaz-Pérez, Ibon Eguiluz Gracia, Sara García Gil, Ruperto González-Pérez, Alicia Habernau Mena, Tamara Hermida Valverde, Sònia Jornet Montaña, Valentín López-Carrasco, Icíar Martínez López, Vicente Merino-Bohórquez, Álvaro Moreno-Ancillo, Ana Cristina Mínguez Cabeza, Emilio Monte-Boquet, Jose Luis Revuelta-Herrero, Silvia Sánchez-Cuellar

The study aimed to reach a consensus on the most relevant patient-reported outcomes (PROs), the corresponding measures (PROMs), and measurement frequency during severe asthma patient follow-up.

Two Delphi rounds were conducted. The questionnaire was developed based on a systematic literature review, a focus group with patients, and a nominal group with experts. It assessed PROs’ relevance and the appropriateness (A) and feasibility (F) of PROMs using a Likert scale (1=totally agree; 9=totally disagree). The consensus was established when ≥75% of participants agreed (1-3) or disagreed (7-9).

Sixty-three professionals (25 hospital pharmacists, 14 allergists, 13 pulmonologists, and 11 nurses) and 5 patients answered the Delphi questionnaire. A consensus was reached on all PROs regarding their relevance. Experts agreed on the use of ACT (A:95.24%; F:95.24%), mini AQLQ (A:93.65; F:79.37%), mMRC dyspnea scale (A:85.71%; F:85.71%), TAI (A:92.06%; F:85.71%), MMAS (A:75.40%; F:82%), and the dispensing register (A:96.83%; F:92.06%). Also considered suitable were: SNOT-22 (A:90.48%; F:73.80%), PSQI (A:82.54; F:63.90%), HADS (A:82.54; F:64%), WPAI (A:77.78%; F:49.20%), TSQM-9 (A:79.37; F:70.50%) and knowledge of asthma questionnaire (A:77%; F:68.80%); however, their use in clinical practice was considered unfeasible. Panelists also agreed on the appropriateness of EQ-5D, which was finally included despite being considered unfeasible (A: 84.13%; F:67.20%) in clinical practice. Agreement was reached on using ACT, TAI, mMRC, and a dispensing register every three months; mini-AQLQ and MMAS every six months; and EQ-5D every twelve months.

This consensus paves the way toward patient-centered care, promoting the development of strategies supporting routine assessment of PROs in severe asthma management.