Italian Validation of the Childhood Atopic Dermatitis Impact Scale: A Contribution to Its Clinical Application

To contribute to the application of the Childhood Atopic Dermatitis Impact Scale (CADIS), 135 Italian parents of children with Atopic Dermatitis (AD) aged birth to 6 years completed: CADIS, Infants Dermatitis Quality of Life Index (IDQOL) or Children\u2019s Dermatology Life Quality Index (CDLQI), and Dermatitis Family Impact questionnaire (DFI). A sub-sample of 66 caregivers completed the CADIS again, 48 hours later. Disease severity was measured with the SCORAD index. Exploratory factor analyses (EFA) almost replicated the general factor structure of the original CADIS, established on a U.S. sample. However, some differences emerged, probably due to cultural differences. A reduced version of the original CADIS was also obtained, based on the EFA, to facilitate use in clinical settings. The original and the shorter versions were tested for reliability: overall Cronbach\u2019s alphas and test-retest reliability for the child- and parent-related scales were acceptable. Regarding concurrent validity, estimates showed the CADIS to adequately correlate with SCORAD, IDQOL-CDLQI and DFI. Multiple comparison tests for discriminant validity revealed significant differences between extreme groups based on AD severity for all 5 domains of CADIS. The original CADIS showed adequate validity and reliability in Italy as well, and the shorter version showed promising psychometric properties

Association of Demographic Factors and Infantile Hemangioma Characteristics with Risk of PHACE Syndrome

Importance: A 2010 prospective study of 108 infants estimated the incidence of PHACE (posterior fossa malformations, hemangioma, arterial anomalies, cardiac defects, eye anomalies) syndrome to be 31% in children with facial infantile hemangiomas (IHs) of at least 22 cm2. There is little evidence regarding the associations among IH characteristics, demographic characteristics, and risk of PHACE syndrome. Objectives: To evaluate demographic characteristics and comorbidities in a large cohort of patients at risk for PHACE syndrome and assess the clinical features of large head and neck IH that may be associated with a greater risk of a diagnosis of PHACE syndrome. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, retrospective cohort study assessed all patients with a facial, head, and/or neck IH who were evaluated for PHACE syndrome from August 1, 2009, to December 31, 2014, at 13 pediatric dermatology referral centers across North America. Data analysis was performed from June 15, 2017, to February 29, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was presence or absence of PHACE syndrome. Data included age at diagnosis, sex, patterns of IH presentation (including size, segment location, and depth), diagnostic procedures and results, and type and number of associated anomalies. Results: A total of 238 patients (mean [SD] age, 2.96 [4.71] months; 184 [77.3%] female) were included in the analysis; 106 (44.5%) met the criteria for definite (n = 98) or possible (n = 8) PHACE syndrome. A stepwise linear regression model found that a surface area of 25 cm2or greater (odds ratio [OR] 2.99; 95% CI, 1.49-6.02) and involvement of 3 or more locations (OR, 17.96; 95% CI, 6.10-52.85) to be statistically significant risk factors for PHACE syndrome. Involvement of the parotid gland (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.18-0.85) and segment S2 (OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.16-0.91) was associated with a lower risk. Race and ethnicity may also be associated with PHACE syndrome risk, although more studies are needed. Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study further described factors associated with both a higher and lower risk of PHACE syndrome. The presence of multiple anatomical sites and large surface area were associated with greater risk, whereas S2 or parotid IHs were associated with lower, but still potential, risk. These findings can help in counseling families and decision-making regarding evaluation of infants with large head and neck IHs.12 month embargo; published online: 16 June 2021This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at [email protected]