Validation of the Turkish version of the Urticaria Control Test: Correlation with other tools and comparison between spontaneous and inducible chronic urticaria.

Background: The urticaria control test (UCT) is a questionnaire designed to determine if chronic urticaria (CU) is controlled or not and to aid therapeutic decision-making. It collects retrospective information about the symptoms and quality of life impairment over the last 4 weeks. The current study aimed to investigate the validity, reliability and sensitivity to change of the Turkish version of the UCT. We also evaluated its correlation with other tools and compared the UCT results of patients with chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) and patients with chronic inducible urticaria (CINDU).

Methods: Following forward/backward translation and cognitive debriefing, the Turkish version of the UCT was used in 81 CSU and 78 CINDU patients. Dermatology life quality index (DLQI), Chronic urticaria quality of life questionnaire (CU-Q2oL), urticaria activity score (UAS), patients' and physicians' global assessment visual analog scores and Likert scales were used at baseline and after four weeks to assess quality of life impairment, disease activity and disease control. Statistical analysis to determine the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the UCT as well as comparison between CINDU and CSU patients were performed.

Results: Duration of disease was longer, disease control was poorer and severe complaints were more frequent in CINDU patients (duration of disease: 36.3 (24) ± 49.1 vs 31.5 (9) ± 67.9, p = .007, UCT baseline: 8.4 (8) ± 3.4 vs 10.4 (11) ± 3.9, p = .001 and patient's global assessment Likert scale severe complaints: 6 vs 15, p < .001, respectively). The UCT showed excellent internal consistency for CSU and a minimally acceptable consistency for CINDU Cronbach's α 0.89 for CSU versus 0.68 for CINDU). It showed strong correlation with CU-Q2oL but a moderate correlation with DLQI (r = -0.649, P < .001 and r = -0.545, P < .001, respectively). It was able to discriminate between patients with different disease control and was sensitive to detect changes in the disease control in both groups. The minimally important difference of the UCT was found to be 3.

Conclusions: The Turkish version of the UCT is a valid and reliable tool for the management of CU patients and can be used both in CSU and CINDU patients to determine if the treatment is sufficient and if disease activity and quality of life impairment are under control or not.