Quality of life in patients with central centrifugal cicatricial alopecia: a preliminary study

Maranga, Abena; Roche, Fritzlaine C.; Alausa, Maryam; McWilliams, Tara; Margolis, David J.; Fabbrocini, Gabriella; Lauro, C. di; Cataldo, Rosanna; Taylor, Susan C.

doi:10.1111/bjd.21710

Cited by 6 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A disease‐specific tool CCCA‐QLI, employed by Maranga et al, 20 in 56 patients with CCCA, showed an impaired life quality with a mean QoL of 53.31 on a scale of 0 (best) to 100 (worst), where a score > 50 indicates a significant impairment of quality of life. Scores in subjective symptoms and objective signs, two of the three sections of the CCCA‐QLI, suggest considerably reduced quality of life (77.0 and 60.7, respectively).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The studies investigated QoL in the following conditions: cicatricial alopecia ( n = 4), 15,24,29,30 LPP ( n = 2), 26,27 LPP and FFA ( n = 2), 17,25 FFA ( n = 3), 21,23,28 FD ( n = 1), 22 and CCCA ( n = 2) 19,20 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…50 A specific tool to understand the impact of AGA on women's QoL Women's Androgenetic Alopecia Quality of Life Questionnaire (WAA-QOL) 51 also found validity and application in women suffering from AA. 46 These diseaseadapted QoL tools like CCCA-QLI 20 employed by Maranga et al, or even hair-specific instruments, are more reflective of patient experiences. They might be more sensitive to understanding the major contributors to a lower quality of life rather than a tool meant for skin diseases.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The scales that were used in reporting the severity included LPP activity index (LPPAI; n = 5), 17,[25][26][27]29 frontal hairline regression (n = 1), 23 FFA severity grade (n = 2), 21,28 and folliculitis decalvans severity grade (n = 1). 22 The tools that were used to measure the quality of life included dermatology life quality index (DLQI; n = 9), 15,17,21,22,25,26,[28][29][30] Functional Assessment of Non-Life threatening conditions (FANLTC; n = 1), 23 CCCA barriers to care and quality of life (n = 1), 19 CCCA Quality of life index (CCCA-QLI), 20 Short Form 12 health survey version 2 (SF12; n = 1), 22 Short Form health survey (SF36; n = 2), 27,28 Hairdex (n = 1) 24 and Hair specific Skindex-29 (HSS29; n = 1). 15 All the relevant study characteristics are displayed in Table S1.…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Out of the 14 included studies, only two studies 20,21 justified the sample size. Two of the studies mentioned the limitation of being conducted in tertiary centers or specialized hair centers, raising concern about selection bias 20,29 ; however, even if not mentioned, depending on the healthcare system, more studies could actually be affected by this bias. Except for Akintilo et al, 19 no study gave any information about non-responders i.e.…”

Section: Risk Of Bias In Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Health‐related quality of life (hrQoL) among patients with primary cicatricial alopecia (PCA): A systematic review

Singh

Wilborn

Lintzeri

et al. 2023

Acad Dermatol Venereol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cicatricial alopecia may lead to an enormous emotional burden, social distress, and psychological impairment affecting the quality of life. The objective of this review is to systematically describe the health‐related quality of life in adults with primary cicatricial alopecia and its subtypes. Studies that (i) reported quality of life in patients with primary cicatricial alopecia or its subtypes; (ii) were original research and not a conference abstract or review (iii) with patients >18 years of age were included in the review. The studies not mentioning quality of life specifically for the cicatricial alopecia cohort were excluded. We searched for literature via OVID in Medline and Embase, in Web of Science, CINAHL, EBSCO (APA PsycArticles, APA PsycInfo, and PSYNDEX Literature), in the Cochrane Library and for grey literature from its inception date till 12 November 2022. The risk of bias was assessed by using the AXIS tool for cross‐sectional studies by two independent authors. Thirteen observational cross‐sectional and one single‐arm study, including 572 patients and eight different instruments, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Results are descriptively synthesized, and associated factors of quality of life are presented. The data from studies that used the Dermatology Life Quality Index tool (DLQI) showed that more than 70% of the patients have an impaired life quality. While trichodynia and anxiety have a negative effect on the quality of life, disease duration, education, employment, and marital status have no effect. The findings were inconsistent for other factors. Most of these studies failed to justify the sample size. Furthermore, the risk of bias assessment could not surely rule out a non‐response bias. Our results suggest that cicatricial alopecia treatments must be integrated with psychosocial intervention and indicate the need for further research with homogenous and more comprehensive tools to identify and address this patient population's unmet mental health needs.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%