Developing a bespoke patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for genital dermatoses: A pilot service evaluation
Rattachement africain : gb. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Background Genital dermatoses (GDs) significantly impact sexual health and psychosocial wellbeing, yet no specific patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) exists for this population. Our study aimed to appraise patient perspectives on GDs by composing a PROM to evaluate biopsychosocial concerns and compare outcomes between new and follow-up patients results. Methods A literature review of applicable existing PROMs resulted in the selection of 14 pre-validated questions covering 3 domains: physical symptoms, quality-of-life and mental health. The response rate was 77.1% for the final PROM, with 48 responses for analysis following the exclusion of 6 incomplete responses. Results The follow-up group showed a reduction in average scores compared to new patients, decreasing from 2.41 to 2.05 ( p = 0.0002) with a lower score indicating better outcomes. All the questions showed a decrease in score from new to follow-up patients. Results revealed significant improvements in the average pain score among follow-up patients. Conclusions Our findings demonstrate the necessity of PROMs in improving patient-centred care. Results indicated significant improvements in physical wellbeing in follow-up patients, affirming efficacy of existing treatments and suggested a necessity for greater psychological support to those suffering from genital dermatoses.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Developing a bespoke patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for genital dermatoses: A pilot service evaluation
- Date Crossref
- 08/12/2025
- Éditeur
- SAGE Publications
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.