Accuracy of Achalasia Quality of Life and Eckardt scores for assessment of clinical improvement post treatment for achalasia.
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Cross-Sectional Studies
Dilatation
/ methods
Esophageal Achalasia
/ diagnosis
Esophagoscopy
Female
Health Status Indicators
Heller Myotomy
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Myotomy
/ methods
Patient Reported Outcome Measures
Prognosis
Quality of Life
Reproducibility of Results
Severity of Illness Index
Treatment Outcome
achalasia
achalasia questionnaires
heller myotomy
pneumatic dilatation
Journal
Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus
ISSN: 1442-2050
Titre abrégé: Dis Esophagus
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8809160
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 Feb 2021
10 Feb 2021
Historique:
received:
06
02
2020
revised:
23
04
2020
accepted:
03
05
2020
pubmed:
3
9
2020
medline:
9
7
2021
entrez:
3
9
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Achalasia Quality of Life (ASQ) and Eckardt scores are two patient-reported instruments widely used to assess symptom severity in achalasia patients. ASQ is validated and reliable. Although Eckardt is commonly used, it has not been rigorously assessed for validity or reliability. This study aims to evaluate (i) the accuracy of Eckardt and ASQ for assessing improvement post-treatment (predictive validity), (ii) accuracy of Eckardt and ASQ for assessing improvement post-treatment with pneumatic dilatation (PD) versus surgical myotomy (predictive validity), and (iii) convergent validity of Eckardt and ASQ tools. Patients with achalasia treated between 2011 and 2018 were eligible. Both instruments were administered by telephone. Treatment failure was determined by the review of medical records by two clinicians. The predictive ability of ASQ and Eckardt instruments in identifying treatment successes and failures was determined using receiver operating characteristics analysis and summarized as area under the curve (AUC). A total of 106 patients met inclusion criteria with 39 PD, 51 Heller myotomy, and 16 per-oral endoscopic myotomy. A review of medical records and esophageal testing revealed 13 failures (12%). AUC for Eckardt was 0.96 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87-0.99] and ASQ 0.97 (95% CI 0.92-0.99). The Eckardt cutoff 4, and ASQ, cutoff 15, were 94% and 87% accurate in identifying treatment successes versus failures, respectively. The correlation coefficient between the two tools was 0.85. In conclusions, (i) ASQ and Eckardt scores are valid and reliable tools to assess symptom severity in achalasia patients, (ii) both instruments accurately classify treatment successes versus failures, and (iii) the choice of tool should be informed by the physicians and patients' values and preferences and repeat physiologic testing may be reserved for treatment failures with either instrument and patients classified, as treatment successes may be spared routine physiologic testing in the long term.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32875315
pii: 5900199
doi: 10.1093/dote/doaa080
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Review
Validation Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.