Bleeding self‐assessments by patients with immune thrombocytopenia (ITP): An agreement study

Bianca Clerici,Sahrish Masood,Ishac Nazy,Ngan Tang,Madison Cranstone,Yang Liu,Milena Hadzi‐Tosev,Joanne Nixon,Melanie St John,Maryam Shirinzadeh,Erin Jamula,John G. Kelton,Donald M. Arnold
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ajh.27298
IF: 13.265
2024-03-29
American Journal of Hematology
Abstract:We designed anagreement study to compare the results of bleeding assessments done in tandem by ITP patients and trained research staff. We used a modified version of the ITP Bleeding Scale, which captured the patients' worst bleeding event at any of nine anatomical sites since the time of the last assessment. Interrater agreement was determined using the 2‐way kappa for the assessment of severe vs. non‐severe bleeds. We analyzed 108 consecutive patients with ITP from the McMaster ITP Registry who had duplicate bleeding assessments. Two‐way agreement was excellent for gynecological (k = 0.86, 95% CI 0.71‐1.02), gastrointestinal (k = 1), genitourinary (k = 1), pulmonary (k = 1) and intracranial (k = 1) bleeds; good for skin (k = 0.68, 95% CI, 0.54‐0.82), oral (k = 0.76, 95% CI, 0.53‐0.98) and ocular (k = 0.66, 95% CI, 0.04‐1‐28) bleeds; and moderate for epistaxis (k = 0.58, 95% CI, 0.21‐0.95). Bleeding self‐assessments by ITP patients were similar to trained research staff, but disagreements in severity grades were more frequent with skin bleeds, oral bleeds and epistaxis. Bleeding self‐assessments could simplify bleeding assessments in clinical trials.
hematology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?