Self-Reported Hidradenitis Suppurativa Severity: Is It Useful for Clinical Practice?

Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is considered to be the most burdensome dermatosis, with a well-documented negative influence on quality of life (QoL). The patient's perception of the disorder, assessed as the self-reported severity, has been used in other dermatoses but not in HS. The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of self-reported HS severity in clinical practice.

The study was performed on a group of 130 Spanish HS patients. HS severity was assessed for all the subjects. Hurley staging and patient self-reported severity were used. Moreover, QoL impairment was evaluated using the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and the Hidradenitis Suppurativa Quality of Life 24 (HSQoL-24) questionnaire.

The severity of HS according to the Hurley staging was most commonly assessed as Hurley II (47.7%), indicating moderate disease, followed by severe disease (Hurley III, 26.9%) and mild disease (Hurley I, 25.4%). According to the patient self-reported HS severity, most of the patients reported having mild disease (76 patients, 58.5%), followed by moderate disease (31 patients, 23.8%). Only 23 patients (17.7%) assessed their disease as severe. Moreover, men reported mild disease significantly more frequently than women (70.9% and 49.3%, respectively; p = 0.014). The self-reported HS severity correlated positively with the effect of the disease on patient QoL assessed with DLQI (r = 0.288, p < 0.001). Likewise, a strong positive correlation was found between self-reported HS severity and QoL impairment assessed with HSQoL-24 (r = 0.404, p = 0.001). No statistically significant correlation between Hurley severity stage and DLQI or HSQoL-24 was found. Moreover, there were significant differences in both DLQI and HSQoL-24 total score between different self-reported HS severities. This was not seen for any of the QoL instruments or for Hurley severity staging.

The results show that self-assessment severity may reflect patients' subjective feelings more adequately than popular objective instruments, and there should be a place for its use in daily clinical practice.