Evidence Hub

Validation of the PAGI-SYM and PAGI-QOL among healing and maintenance of erosive esophagitis clinical trial participants

Wyrwich KW, Mody R, Larsen LM, Lee M, Harnam N, Revicki DA

Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 2010

4,092 participants · 15 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Valid instruments are needed to assess important patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in erosive esophagitis (EE).

METHODS: Data from 4,092 patients in clinical trials to determine efficacy of dexlansoprazole MR to heal EE and maintain healed EE were used to assess the psychometric properties of the Patient Assessment of Upper Gastrointestinal Disorders-Quality of Life (PAGI-QOL) and the PAGI-Symptoms Severity Index (PAGI-SYM). A daily diary, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) Symptoms Investigator Assessment and endoscopy results were also used in this study.

RESULTS: PAGI-QOL and PAGI-SYM subscales and total score internal consistency reliability estimates for both studies were acceptable (Cronbach's alpha coefficient = 0.81-0.97). Most subscale and total scores yielded moderate-to-strong correlations with other measures reflecting signs and symptoms of EE. Some subscales were able to detect differences >1 standard error of measurement (SEM) in change scores among patients with improved heartburn frequency compared to those with stable/worsening heartburn frequency in the healing study. Those with relapsed EE demonstrated differences >1 SEM in some PAGI-QOL and PAGI-SYM subscale or total scores compared to patients who maintained their healing status.

CONCLUSION: The findings of this study support the consideration of the PAGI-QOL and PAGI-SYM in future clinical trials and in the general EE population.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 4,092 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free