Advanced

Measurement of damage in systemic vasculitis: a comparison of the Vasculitis Damage Index with the Combined Damage Assessment Index

Suppiah, Ravi; Flossmann, Oliver; Mukhtyar, Chetan; Alberici, Federico; Baslund, Bo; Brown, Denise; Hasan, Nadeem; Holle, Julia; Hruskova, Zdenka and Jayne, David, et al. (2011) In Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 70(1). p.80-85
Abstract
Objectives To compare the Vasculitis Damage Index (VDI) with the Combined Damage Assessment Index (CDA) as measures of damage from vasculitis. Methods A total of 283 patients with vasculitis from 11 European centres were evaluated in a cross-sectional study using the VDI and CDA. Results Wegener's granulomatosis (58.4%) and microscopic polyangiitis (11.0%) were the most common diagnoses. Agreement between VDI and CDA scores (Spearman's correlation) was 0.90 (95% CI 0.87 to 0.92). There was good correlation between individual comparably evaluated organ systems (Spearman's correlation 0.70-0.94). Interobserver reliability (assessed by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)) was 0.94 (95% CI 0.89 to 0.98) for VDI and 0.78 (95% CI 0.63 to... (More)
Objectives To compare the Vasculitis Damage Index (VDI) with the Combined Damage Assessment Index (CDA) as measures of damage from vasculitis. Methods A total of 283 patients with vasculitis from 11 European centres were evaluated in a cross-sectional study using the VDI and CDA. Results Wegener's granulomatosis (58.4%) and microscopic polyangiitis (11.0%) were the most common diagnoses. Agreement between VDI and CDA scores (Spearman's correlation) was 0.90 (95% CI 0.87 to 0.92). There was good correlation between individual comparably evaluated organ systems (Spearman's correlation 0.70-0.94). Interobserver reliability (assessed by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)) was 0.94 (95% CI 0.89 to 0.98) for VDI and 0.78 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.93) for CDA. Intraobserver reliability was 0.92 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.00) for VDI and 0.87 (95% CI 0.75 to 1.00) for CDA. A total of 13 items were not used in the VDI compared to 23 in the CDA. Observers agreed that the CDA covered the full spectrum of damage attributable to vasculitis but was more time consuming and thus possibly less feasible for clinical and research purposes. Conclusions The VDI and CDA capture reliable data on damage among patients with vasculitis. The CDA captures more detail but is more complex and less practical than the VDI. Further evolution of damage assessment in vasculitis is likely to include key elements from both instruments. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
, et al. (More)
(Less)
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases
volume
70
issue
1
pages
80 - 85
publisher
British Medical Association
external identifiers
  • wos:000285381100013
  • scopus:78650676922
ISSN
1468-2060
DOI
10.1136/ard.2009.122952
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
8c9c2e88-8dbd-4000-a199-34c89a4208ef (old id 1774076)
date added to LUP
2011-02-01 09:58:05
date last changed
2017-08-20 03:59:35
@article{8c9c2e88-8dbd-4000-a199-34c89a4208ef,
  abstract     = {Objectives To compare the Vasculitis Damage Index (VDI) with the Combined Damage Assessment Index (CDA) as measures of damage from vasculitis. Methods A total of 283 patients with vasculitis from 11 European centres were evaluated in a cross-sectional study using the VDI and CDA. Results Wegener's granulomatosis (58.4%) and microscopic polyangiitis (11.0%) were the most common diagnoses. Agreement between VDI and CDA scores (Spearman's correlation) was 0.90 (95% CI 0.87 to 0.92). There was good correlation between individual comparably evaluated organ systems (Spearman's correlation 0.70-0.94). Interobserver reliability (assessed by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)) was 0.94 (95% CI 0.89 to 0.98) for VDI and 0.78 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.93) for CDA. Intraobserver reliability was 0.92 (95% CI 0.83 to 1.00) for VDI and 0.87 (95% CI 0.75 to 1.00) for CDA. A total of 13 items were not used in the VDI compared to 23 in the CDA. Observers agreed that the CDA covered the full spectrum of damage attributable to vasculitis but was more time consuming and thus possibly less feasible for clinical and research purposes. Conclusions The VDI and CDA capture reliable data on damage among patients with vasculitis. The CDA captures more detail but is more complex and less practical than the VDI. Further evolution of damage assessment in vasculitis is likely to include key elements from both instruments.},
  author       = {Suppiah, Ravi and Flossmann, Oliver and Mukhtyar, Chetan and Alberici, Federico and Baslund, Bo and Brown, Denise and Hasan, Nadeem and Holle, Julia and Hruskova, Zdenka and Jayne, David and Judge, Andrew and Little, Mark A. and Merkel, Peter A. and Palmisano, Alessandra and Seo, Philip and Stegeman, Coen and Tesar, Vladimir and Vaglio, Augusto and Westman, Kerstin and Luqmani, Raashid},
  issn         = {1468-2060},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {1},
  pages        = {80--85},
  publisher    = {British Medical Association},
  series       = {Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases},
  title        = {Measurement of damage in systemic vasculitis: a comparison of the Vasculitis Damage Index with the Combined Damage Assessment Index},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/ard.2009.122952},
  volume       = {70},
  year         = {2011},
}