TY - JOUR
T1 - Why quality of life measurement is important in dermatology clinical practice
T2 - An expert-based opinion statement by the EADV Task Force on Quality of Life
AU - the EADV Task Force on Quality of Life
AU - Finlay, A. Y.
AU - Salek, M. S.
AU - Abeni, D.
AU - Tomás-Aragonés, L.
AU - van Cranenburgh, O. D.
AU - Evers, A. W.M.
AU - Jemec, G. B.E.
AU - Linder, D.
AU - Manolache, L.
AU - Marrón, S. E.
AU - Prinsen, C. A.C.
AU - Susitaival, P.
AU - Chernyshov, P. V.
PY - 2017/3/1
Y1 - 2017/3/1
N2 - The aim of this study was to describe the many ways in which quality of life (QoL) measurement may potentially be advantageous in routine clinical dermatology practice. Thirteen members of the EADV Task Force on Quality of Life, eight dermatologists, three health psychologists, one epidemiologist and one pharmacoepidemiologist, independently listed all of the ways they thought this may be advantageous. A total of 108 different ways of using QoL information in clinical practice were suggested (median per participant = 8, range = 4–15), and were classified into 20 descriptive groups. These were sorted into the following five categories: inform clinical decisions, clinician–patient communication, awareness of skin disease burden, informing the consultation and clinical service administration. The wide range of potential benefits identified may not only encourage clinicians to use these measures but also highlights many areas requiring evidence to establish the true value of routine use of QoL measures.
AB - The aim of this study was to describe the many ways in which quality of life (QoL) measurement may potentially be advantageous in routine clinical dermatology practice. Thirteen members of the EADV Task Force on Quality of Life, eight dermatologists, three health psychologists, one epidemiologist and one pharmacoepidemiologist, independently listed all of the ways they thought this may be advantageous. A total of 108 different ways of using QoL information in clinical practice were suggested (median per participant = 8, range = 4–15), and were classified into 20 descriptive groups. These were sorted into the following five categories: inform clinical decisions, clinician–patient communication, awareness of skin disease burden, informing the consultation and clinical service administration. The wide range of potential benefits identified may not only encourage clinicians to use these measures but also highlights many areas requiring evidence to establish the true value of routine use of QoL measures.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84998678942&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/jdv.13985
DO - 10.1111/jdv.13985
M3 - Review
C2 - 27684717
AN - SCOPUS:84998678942
SN - 0926-9959
VL - 31
SP - 424
EP - 431
JO - Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology
JF - Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology
IS - 3
ER -