Table 3.

Summary of DAPSA group discussions.

Key views of 3 DAPSA groups (composed of 3 PRP, 33 rheumatologists, 3 dermatologists, 0 academics, and 3 members of industry)
Themes independently arising in all 3 groups with general agreement: DAPSA is a measure of peripheral articular disease in PsA A strength of DAPSA is the separate measurement of peripheral arthritis, therefore not diluted/influenced by other domains DAPSA is not a measure of psoriatic disease or the total burden of PsA cDAPSA is feasible clinically in its current form Modifications could be tested, including a skin module and additional MSK manifestations (enthesitis) DAPSA could be tested as a “module” to assess peripheral articular disease in CPDAI Impact (using PsAID) should be assessed separate from activity Additional comments arising in individual groups without agreement: Could DAPSA be used for screening in dermatology clinics? CRP was felt to be a significant limitation for feasible integration into clinical practice in some countries, including the United States, where CRP is often not available at the time of the visit. 66/68 joint count is challenging in clinical practice (applies to PASDAS and CPDAI as well) DAPSA responses in RCT not as good as other composites The continuous score is useful for clinical practice Practicing non-academic clinicians do not use PRO 3VAS score or RAPID-3 is feasible and should be considered Fibromyalgia affects all PRO PRO help promote self-efficacy Rheumatologists struggle to assess skin

Key views of 3 DAPSA groups (composed of 3 PRP, 33 rheumatologists, 3 dermatologists, 0 academics, and 3 members of industry)

Themes independently arising in all 3 groups with general agreement:

DAPSA is a measure of peripheral articular disease in PsA
A strength of DAPSA is the separate measurement of peripheral arthritis, therefore not diluted/influenced by other domains
DAPSA is not a measure of psoriatic disease or the total burden of PsA
cDAPSA is feasible clinically in its current form
Modifications could be tested, including a skin module and additional MSK manifestations (enthesitis)
DAPSA could be tested as a “module” to assess peripheral articular disease in CPDAI
Impact (using PsAID) should be assessed separate from activity

Additional comments arising in individual groups without agreement:

Could DAPSA be used for screening in dermatology clinics?
CRP was felt to be a significant limitation for feasible integration into clinical practice in some countries, including the United States, where CRP is often not available at the time of the visit.
66/68 joint count is challenging in clinical practice (applies to PASDAS and CPDAI as well)
DAPSA responses in RCT not as good as other composites
- The continuous score is useful for clinical practice
- Practicing non-academic clinicians do not use PRO
- 3VAS score or RAPID-3 is feasible and should be considered
- Fibromyalgia affects all PRO
- PRO help promote self-efficacy
- Rheumatologists struggle to assess skin

PsA: psoriatic arthritis; DAPSA: Disease Activity for PsA; PRP: patient research partners; cDAPSA: clinical DAPSA; MSK: musculoskeletal; CPDAI: Composite Psoriatic Disease Activity Index; PsAID: PsA Impact of Disease; CRP: C-reactive protein; PASDAS: PsA Disease Activity Score; RCT: randomized controlled trials; PRO: patient-reported outcomes; 3VAS: 3 visual analog scale; RAPID-3: Routine Assessment of Patient Index Data 3.