Validation of Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) with other venous severity assessment tools from the American Venous Forum, National Venous Screening Program

Marc A. Passman, Robert B. McLafferty, Michelle F. Lentz, Shardul B. Nagre, Mark D. Iafrati, W. Todd Bohannon, Colleen M. Moore, Jennifer A. Heller, Joseph R. Schneider, Joann M. Lohr, Joseph A. Caprini

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Several standard venous assessment tools have been used as independent determinants of venous disease severity, but correlation between these instruments as a global venous screening tool has not been tested. The scope of this study is to assess the validity of Venous Clinical Severity Scoring (VCSS) and its integration with other venous assessment tools as a global venous screening instrument. Methods: The American Venous Forum (AVF), National Venous Screening Program (NVSP) data registry from 2007 to 2009 was queried for participants with complete datasets, including CEAP clinical staging, VCSS, modified Chronic Venous Insufficiency Quality of Life (CIVIQ) assessment, and venous ultrasound results. Statistical correlation trends were analyzed using Spearman's rank coefficient as related to VCSS. Results: Five thousand eight hundred fourteen limbs in 2,907 participants were screened and included CEAP clinical stage C0: 26%; C1: 33%; C2: 24%; C3: 9%; C4: 7%; C5: 0.5%; C6: 0.2% (mean, 1.41 ± 1.22). VCSS mean score distribution (range, 0-3) for the entire cohort included: pain 1.01 ± 0.80, varicose veins 0.61 ± 0.84, edema 0.61 ± 0.81, pigmentation 0.15 ± 0.47, inflammation 0.07 ± 0.33, induration 0.04 ± 0.27, ulcer number 0.004 ± 0.081, ulcer size 0.007 ± 0.112, ulcer duration 0.007 ± 0.134, and compression 0.30 ± 0.81. Overall correlation between CEAP and VCSS was moderately strong (r s = 0.49; P s = 0.51; P s = 0.39; P s = 0.28; P s = 0.22; P s = 0.21; P s = 0.43; P s = 0.55; P s = 0.30; P s = 0.23; P s = 0.32; P s = 0.06; P s = 0.003; P =.7947). Conclusions: While there is correlation between VCSS, CEAP, modified CIVIQ, and venous ultrasound findings, subgroup analysis indicates that this correlation is driven by different components of VCSS compared with the other venous assessment tools. This observation may reflect that VCSS has more global application in determining overall severity of venous disease, while at the same time highlighting the strengths of the other venous assessment tools.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Vascular Surgery
Volume54
Issue number6 SUPPL.
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2011

Fingerprint

Ulcer
Venous Insufficiency
Quality of Life
Varicose Veins
Pigmentation
Registries
Edema
Extremities
Inflammation
Pain
Datasets

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Surgery

Cite this

Validation of Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) with other venous severity assessment tools from the American Venous Forum, National Venous Screening Program. / Passman, Marc A.; McLafferty, Robert B.; Lentz, Michelle F.; Nagre, Shardul B.; Iafrati, Mark D.; Bohannon, W. Todd; Moore, Colleen M.; Heller, Jennifer A.; Schneider, Joseph R.; Lohr, Joann M.; Caprini, Joseph A.

In: Journal of Vascular Surgery, Vol. 54, No. 6 SUPPL., 12.2011.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Passman, MA, McLafferty, RB, Lentz, MF, Nagre, SB, Iafrati, MD, Bohannon, WT, Moore, CM, Heller, JA, Schneider, JR, Lohr, JM & Caprini, JA 2011, 'Validation of Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) with other venous severity assessment tools from the American Venous Forum, National Venous Screening Program', Journal of Vascular Surgery, vol. 54, no. 6 SUPPL.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2011.05.117
Passman, Marc A. ; McLafferty, Robert B. ; Lentz, Michelle F. ; Nagre, Shardul B. ; Iafrati, Mark D. ; Bohannon, W. Todd ; Moore, Colleen M. ; Heller, Jennifer A. ; Schneider, Joseph R. ; Lohr, Joann M. ; Caprini, Joseph A. / Validation of Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) with other venous severity assessment tools from the American Venous Forum, National Venous Screening Program. In: Journal of Vascular Surgery. 2011 ; Vol. 54, No. 6 SUPPL.
@article{a62a9872b2c74702b276483f450364a8,
title = "Validation of Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) with other venous severity assessment tools from the American Venous Forum, National Venous Screening Program",
abstract = "Background: Several standard venous assessment tools have been used as independent determinants of venous disease severity, but correlation between these instruments as a global venous screening tool has not been tested. The scope of this study is to assess the validity of Venous Clinical Severity Scoring (VCSS) and its integration with other venous assessment tools as a global venous screening instrument. Methods: The American Venous Forum (AVF), National Venous Screening Program (NVSP) data registry from 2007 to 2009 was queried for participants with complete datasets, including CEAP clinical staging, VCSS, modified Chronic Venous Insufficiency Quality of Life (CIVIQ) assessment, and venous ultrasound results. Statistical correlation trends were analyzed using Spearman's rank coefficient as related to VCSS. Results: Five thousand eight hundred fourteen limbs in 2,907 participants were screened and included CEAP clinical stage C0: 26{\%}; C1: 33{\%}; C2: 24{\%}; C3: 9{\%}; C4: 7{\%}; C5: 0.5{\%}; C6: 0.2{\%} (mean, 1.41 ± 1.22). VCSS mean score distribution (range, 0-3) for the entire cohort included: pain 1.01 ± 0.80, varicose veins 0.61 ± 0.84, edema 0.61 ± 0.81, pigmentation 0.15 ± 0.47, inflammation 0.07 ± 0.33, induration 0.04 ± 0.27, ulcer number 0.004 ± 0.081, ulcer size 0.007 ± 0.112, ulcer duration 0.007 ± 0.134, and compression 0.30 ± 0.81. Overall correlation between CEAP and VCSS was moderately strong (r s = 0.49; P s = 0.51; P s = 0.39; P s = 0.28; P s = 0.22; P s = 0.21; P s = 0.43; P s = 0.55; P s = 0.30; P s = 0.23; P s = 0.32; P s = 0.06; P s = 0.003; P =.7947). Conclusions: While there is correlation between VCSS, CEAP, modified CIVIQ, and venous ultrasound findings, subgroup analysis indicates that this correlation is driven by different components of VCSS compared with the other venous assessment tools. This observation may reflect that VCSS has more global application in determining overall severity of venous disease, while at the same time highlighting the strengths of the other venous assessment tools.",
author = "Passman, {Marc A.} and McLafferty, {Robert B.} and Lentz, {Michelle F.} and Nagre, {Shardul B.} and Iafrati, {Mark D.} and Bohannon, {W. Todd} and Moore, {Colleen M.} and Heller, {Jennifer A.} and Schneider, {Joseph R.} and Lohr, {Joann M.} and Caprini, {Joseph A.}",
year = "2011",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1016/j.jvs.2011.05.117",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "54",
journal = "Journal of Vascular Surgery",
issn = "0741-5214",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "6 SUPPL.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Validation of Venous Clinical Severity Score (VCSS) with other venous severity assessment tools from the American Venous Forum, National Venous Screening Program

AU - Passman, Marc A.

AU - McLafferty, Robert B.

AU - Lentz, Michelle F.

AU - Nagre, Shardul B.

AU - Iafrati, Mark D.

AU - Bohannon, W. Todd

AU - Moore, Colleen M.

AU - Heller, Jennifer A.

AU - Schneider, Joseph R.

AU - Lohr, Joann M.

AU - Caprini, Joseph A.

PY - 2011/12

Y1 - 2011/12

N2 - Background: Several standard venous assessment tools have been used as independent determinants of venous disease severity, but correlation between these instruments as a global venous screening tool has not been tested. The scope of this study is to assess the validity of Venous Clinical Severity Scoring (VCSS) and its integration with other venous assessment tools as a global venous screening instrument. Methods: The American Venous Forum (AVF), National Venous Screening Program (NVSP) data registry from 2007 to 2009 was queried for participants with complete datasets, including CEAP clinical staging, VCSS, modified Chronic Venous Insufficiency Quality of Life (CIVIQ) assessment, and venous ultrasound results. Statistical correlation trends were analyzed using Spearman's rank coefficient as related to VCSS. Results: Five thousand eight hundred fourteen limbs in 2,907 participants were screened and included CEAP clinical stage C0: 26%; C1: 33%; C2: 24%; C3: 9%; C4: 7%; C5: 0.5%; C6: 0.2% (mean, 1.41 ± 1.22). VCSS mean score distribution (range, 0-3) for the entire cohort included: pain 1.01 ± 0.80, varicose veins 0.61 ± 0.84, edema 0.61 ± 0.81, pigmentation 0.15 ± 0.47, inflammation 0.07 ± 0.33, induration 0.04 ± 0.27, ulcer number 0.004 ± 0.081, ulcer size 0.007 ± 0.112, ulcer duration 0.007 ± 0.134, and compression 0.30 ± 0.81. Overall correlation between CEAP and VCSS was moderately strong (r s = 0.49; P s = 0.51; P s = 0.39; P s = 0.28; P s = 0.22; P s = 0.21; P s = 0.43; P s = 0.55; P s = 0.30; P s = 0.23; P s = 0.32; P s = 0.06; P s = 0.003; P =.7947). Conclusions: While there is correlation between VCSS, CEAP, modified CIVIQ, and venous ultrasound findings, subgroup analysis indicates that this correlation is driven by different components of VCSS compared with the other venous assessment tools. This observation may reflect that VCSS has more global application in determining overall severity of venous disease, while at the same time highlighting the strengths of the other venous assessment tools.

AB - Background: Several standard venous assessment tools have been used as independent determinants of venous disease severity, but correlation between these instruments as a global venous screening tool has not been tested. The scope of this study is to assess the validity of Venous Clinical Severity Scoring (VCSS) and its integration with other venous assessment tools as a global venous screening instrument. Methods: The American Venous Forum (AVF), National Venous Screening Program (NVSP) data registry from 2007 to 2009 was queried for participants with complete datasets, including CEAP clinical staging, VCSS, modified Chronic Venous Insufficiency Quality of Life (CIVIQ) assessment, and venous ultrasound results. Statistical correlation trends were analyzed using Spearman's rank coefficient as related to VCSS. Results: Five thousand eight hundred fourteen limbs in 2,907 participants were screened and included CEAP clinical stage C0: 26%; C1: 33%; C2: 24%; C3: 9%; C4: 7%; C5: 0.5%; C6: 0.2% (mean, 1.41 ± 1.22). VCSS mean score distribution (range, 0-3) for the entire cohort included: pain 1.01 ± 0.80, varicose veins 0.61 ± 0.84, edema 0.61 ± 0.81, pigmentation 0.15 ± 0.47, inflammation 0.07 ± 0.33, induration 0.04 ± 0.27, ulcer number 0.004 ± 0.081, ulcer size 0.007 ± 0.112, ulcer duration 0.007 ± 0.134, and compression 0.30 ± 0.81. Overall correlation between CEAP and VCSS was moderately strong (r s = 0.49; P s = 0.51; P s = 0.39; P s = 0.28; P s = 0.22; P s = 0.21; P s = 0.43; P s = 0.55; P s = 0.30; P s = 0.23; P s = 0.32; P s = 0.06; P s = 0.003; P =.7947). Conclusions: While there is correlation between VCSS, CEAP, modified CIVIQ, and venous ultrasound findings, subgroup analysis indicates that this correlation is driven by different components of VCSS compared with the other venous assessment tools. This observation may reflect that VCSS has more global application in determining overall severity of venous disease, while at the same time highlighting the strengths of the other venous assessment tools.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=82455192415&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=82455192415&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jvs.2011.05.117

DO - 10.1016/j.jvs.2011.05.117

M3 - Article

VL - 54

JO - Journal of Vascular Surgery

JF - Journal of Vascular Surgery

SN - 0741-5214

IS - 6 SUPPL.

ER -