MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3047275686 · doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2020.07.115

Impact of hidradenitis suppurativa on work productivity and associated risk factors

2020· article· en· W3047275686 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kelsey R. van Straalen, Lisette M. Prens, Tjerk H. Hylkema, Ineke C. Janse, J. C. Dickinson, Ronald H Houwing, Hessel H. van der Zee, Sandra Brouwer, Errol P. Prens, Barbara Horváth

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of the American Academy of Dermatology · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueHidradenitis Suppurativa and Treatments
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesFeinstein Institutes for Medical ResearchUniversitair Medisch Centrum GroningenAmgenNational Psoriasis FoundationNational Institutes of HealthNorthwell HealthIncyte
Mots-clésHidradenitis suppurativaMedicineWork productivityDermatologyProductivityInternal medicineDisease

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

To the Editor: Matusiak et al1Matusiak Ł. Bieniek A. Szepietowski J.C. Hidradenitis suppurativa markedly decreases quality of life and professional activity.J Am Acad Dermatol. 2010; 62: 706-708Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (142) Google Scholar showed that hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) caused absenteeism in 58.1% of patients. However, work impairment due to HS is not limited to absenteeism but could also lead to presenteeism (reduced productivity while at work) and at-work productivity loss (absenteeism plus presenteeism). Knowledge of which HS-related factors are associated with absenteeism, presenteeism, and at-work productivity loss is essential. Therefore, we aimed to assess differences between working and nonworking patients with HS; quantify absenteeism, presenteeism, and at-work productivity loss caused by HS; and identify associated risk factors. All newly referred consecutive patients participating in the HiCARE (METc 2018/110), HiSure (METc 2015/074), and HiScreen (MEC-2016-246) registries between April 2015 and July 2019 were included. Patient characteristics, disease severity, patient-reported outcomes, and comorbidities were collected, and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire, specific health problem version, was used to assess the influence of HS on absenteeism, presenteeism, and at-work productivity loss. See the Supplemental Methods (available via Mendeley at https://doi.org/10.17632/6nmk748p89.1) for details on the between-group analyses, multiple imputations, and regression analyses. Overall, 62.0% (523/843) of patients had work at the time of inclusion. The presence of inguinal/gluteal HS, increased HS severity, higher pain scores, the presence of fibromyalgia, and higher depression and anxiety scores were significantly more common in nonworkers (Table I). Twenty-six percent of working patients reported actual work time missed, with a median absenteeism of 0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.0-5.3). Workers reported a median presenteeism due to HS of 20% (95% CI, 0.0-50.0) and a median at-work productivity loss of 20.0% (95% CI, 0.0-69.0). Results from the univariate regressions analyses are presented in Supplemental Table I (available via Mendeley at https://doi.org/10.17632/6nmk748p89.1). Pain, Dermatology Life Quality Index, and EuroQol–5 Dimensions scores were significantly associated with presenteeism and at-work productivity loss in the multivariate regression models (Table II).Table IPatient characteristics∗Numbers and percentages may not add up to 100% because of rounding of pooled data.Overall†Percentages in this column are reported as percentages of the overall number of patients. (N = 843)Workers‡Percentages in these columns are presented as percentages of the variable on that row. (n = 523)Nonworkers‡Percentages in these columns are presented as percentages of the variable on that row. (n = 320)P value§P-value calculated between workers and nonworkers.Patient characteristics SexFemale, n (%)604 (71.6)373 (61.8)231 (38.2).79 Age, y, mean (SD)38.0 (12.2)37.3 (11.3)39.0 (13.6).06 Age at onset, y, median (IQR)20.0 (15.0-27.0)20.0 (15.0-27.0)19.0 (15.0-28.0).62Missing, n271512 Disease duration, y, median (IQR)12.5 (6.0-22.0)12.8 (6.5-21.0)12.1 (5.1-25.3).51Missing, n271512 BMI, kg/m2, mean (SD)28.7 (6.3)28.5 (6.1)29.1 (6.5).23 Current or ex-smoker, n (%)643 (76.3)390 (60.7)253 (39.3).16 Positive family history121 (23.8)92 (76.0)29 (24.0)<.001Unknown, n (%)115 (22.6)64 (55.7)51 (44.3)Missing, n335195180 Education level, n (%)Low148 (17.6)65 (43.9)83 (56.1)Medium483 (57.3)300 (62.1)183 (37.9)High212 (25.1)158 (74.5)54 (25.5)<.0001Comorbidities Rheumatoid arthritis, n (%)25 (4.2)12 (48.0)13 (52.0).08Missing, n241134107 Fibromyalgia, n (%)9 (1.5)2 (22.2)7 (77.8).008Missing, n242138104 Spondyloarthritis, n (%)5 (0.9)5 (100.0)0 (0.0)NPMissing, n286139147 Crohn's disease, n (%)35 (5.8)19 (54.3)16 (45.7).18Missing, n240133107 Ulcerative colitis, n (%)5 (0.8)3 (60.0)2 (40.0).82Missing, n247137110 Psoriasis, n (%)37 (6.2)20 (54.1)17 (45.9).17Missing, n247139108 Previous depression, n (%)119 (19.3)53 (44.5)66 (55.5)<.0001Missing, n22613492Physician scores Hurley classification, n (%)Stage I390 (46.3)242 (62.1)148 (37.9).18Stage II368 (43.7)224 (60.9)144 (39.1)Stage III85 (10.0)57 (67.1)28 (32.9) Refined Hurley, n (%)Mild (IA, IIA)363 (43.1)227 (61.2)137 (37.7)Moderate (IB, IIB)195 (23.1)132 (77.4)63 (32.3)Severe (IC, IIC, III)285 (33.8)164 (57.5)120 (42.1).003 IHS4, mean (SD)9.4 (15.3)9.5 (17.0)9.1 (11.9).66Mild, n (%)366 (43.4)223 (60.9)144 (39.3).53Moderate, n (%)232 (27.5)151 (65.1)81 (34.9)Severe, n (%)245 (29.1)150 (61.2)96 (39.2) Presence of draining sinus tracts, n (%)349 (41.4)217 (62.2)132 (37.8).94 Affected locations, n (%)Axillae295 (35.0)192 (65.1)102 (34.6).15Groin/buttocks510 (60.5)298 (58.4)212 (41.6).008Patient-reported outcome measures DLQI, mean (SD)11.5 (7.6)10.8 (7.3)12.6 (8.0)<.001 EQ-5D-5 Level, median (IQR)0.75 (0.62-0.84)0.77 (0.66-0.87)0.69 (0.49-0.81)<.001Missing, n278156122 EQ-5D VAS, median (IQR)70.0 (51.0-80.0)70.0 (60.0-80.0)60.0 (45.0-75.0)<.001Missing, n263147116 NRS Pain, mean (SD)5.3 (3.0)5.2 (2.9)5.6 (3.0).04 NRS Pruritus, mean (SD)4.1 (3.0)3.8 (2.9)4.6 (3.1)<.001 NRS Severity, mean (SD)6.0 (2.8)5.8 (2.7)6.2 (2.8).09 HADS Depression, median (IQR)5.0 (2.0-9.0)3.0 (1.0-6.0)8.0 (3.0-11.0)<.001Missing, n481307174 HADS Anxiety, median (IQR)6.0 (3.0-10.0)5.0 (3.0-8.0)8.0 (4.0-12.0)<.001Missing, n481307174BMI, Body mass index; DLQI, Dermatology Life Quality Index; HADS, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Survey; EQ-5D, EuroQol–5 Dimensions; IHS4, International Hidradenitis Suppurativa Severity Score System; IQR, interquartile range; NRS, numeric rating scale; SD, standard deviation; VAS, visual analogue scale.Bold data indicates statistical significance.∗ Numbers and percentages may not add up to 100% because of rounding of pooled data.† Percentages in this column are reported as percentages of the overall number of patients.‡ Percentages in these columns are presented as percentages of the variable on that row.§ P-value calculated between workers and nonworkers. Open table in a new tab Table IIMultivariate∗All multivariate models were corrected for sex, age, BMI, smoking, educational level, and smoking status. linear and logistic regression analysesAssessmentAbsenteeismPresenteeismAt-work productivity lossnBOR (95% CI)P valuenB (95% CI)P valuenB (95% CI)P valueIHS43050.320 (−0.001 to 0.641).051DLQI score3160.0761.079 (1.024 to 1.137).0043021.720 (1.235 to 2.205)<.0013051.904 (1.335 to 2.473)<.001EQ-5D index score316−1.7030.182 (0.030 to 1.111).065302−23.147 (−40.483 to −5.811).009305−29.222 (−49.592 to −8.853).005NRS Pain3160.1461.157 (1.022 to 1.311).0213022.446 (1.464 to 3.428)<.0013052.373 (1.189 to 3.556)<.001CI, Confidence interval; DLQI, Dermatology Life Quality Index; EQ-5D, EuroQol–5 Dimensions; IHS4, International Hidradenitis Suppurativa Severity Score System; NRS, numeric rating scale; OR, odds ratio.∗ All multivariate models were corrected for sex, age, BMI, smoking, educational level, and smoking status. Open table in a new tab BMI, Body mass index; DLQI, Dermatology Life Quality Index; HADS, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Survey; EQ-5D, EuroQol–5 Dimensions; IHS4, International Hidradenitis Suppurativa Severity Score System; IQR, interquartile range; NRS, numeric rating scale; SD, standard deviation; VAS, visual analogue scale. Bold data indicates statistical significance. CI, Confidence interval; DLQI, Dermatology Life Quality Index; EQ-5D, EuroQol–5 Dimensions; IHS4, International Hidradenitis Suppurativa Severity Score System; NRS, numeric rating scale; OR, odds ratio. The level of absenteeism found in our study seems to be slightly lower than that found in a Danish study and substantially lower than that found in a Canadian study: 7.0% ± 21.2% and 14.5% ± 27.0%, respectively.2Yao Y. Jørgensen A.R. Thomsen S.F. Work productivity and activity impairment in patients with hidradenitis suppurativa: a cross-sectional study.Int J Dermatol. 2020; 59: 333-340Crossref PubMed Scopus (5) Google Scholar,3Sandhu V.K. Shah M. Piguet V. Alavi A. The impact of Hidradenitis suppurativa on work productivity and activity impairment.Br J Dermatol. 2020; 182: 1288-1290Crossref PubMed Scopus (3) Google Scholar One explanation could be the larger proportion of nonworking patients in our study. In The Netherlands (and Denmark), adequate unemployment benefits are provided, which might lead to a higher percentage of nonworking patients and potentially lower levels of absenteeism among those still at work. This highlights that unemployment and work productivity data among patients with HS should be interpreted and extrapolated with caution because the results are highly influenced by the work climate and access to unemployment benefits in the study country. Nonetheless, the factors associated with nonwork and at-work productivity loss in our study are modifiable through medical and/or surgical treatment, which could have a favorable effect on work status and productivity. However, this cross-sectional study does not allow for the assessment of causality in the found associations. Overall, this study shows that several potentially modifiable factors such as inguinal/gluteal involvement, more severe disease, and higher depression and anxiety scores are more common among nonworkers. Additionally, among working patients, pain and quality of life are associated with at-work productivity loss. This indicates the need for adequate treatment and pain management to limit work absence and reduce at-work productivity loss among patients with HS.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,004
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,015

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,020
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0020,001
Science ouverte0,0020,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0040,004
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,025
Tête enseignante GPT0,318
Écart entre enseignants0,293 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations21
Publié2020
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of the American Academy of DermatologyMême sujetHidradenitis Suppurativa and TreatmentsTravaux en français237 207