Updated Prospective Cohort Study Comparing PROVAM and OVAMA Questionnaires in Assessing Health-Related Quality of Life in Vascular Malformation Patients

Assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with vascular malformations (VMs) is vital due to the condition’s complexity and varied presentations, requiring long-term, multidisciplinary care. This updated analysis expands on our previous study comparing two validated HRQoL tools—PROVAM and OVAMA {1,2,3}. While both are valid and reliable, determining the most effective for patient care remains a challenge. This study further examines patient preferences, subgroup differences, and the correlation between these PROMs and HRQoL limitations in VM patients.


Materials and Methods:

In this prospective clinical trial, 282 patients with VMs from a vascular anomalies clinic completed the PROVAM and OVAMA questionnaires, along with a comparative survey, between December 2021 and September 2024. A total of 346 questionnaires were submitted, duplicate surveys from the same patient and partial survey responses were removed from analysis. Chi-square analyses were conducted to assess potential advantages of each questionnaire for specific patient subgroups.



Results: Of the 267 patients analyzed, 89 (33.3%) reported no pain in the past four weeks, while 178 (66.7%) experienced pain due to their VM. A significant difference in survey preference was observed between patients experiencing pain and those without pain (p=0.005). Among 169 patients (63.3%) who expressed a preference, 63 (57.8%) with pain preferred PROVAM, while 40 (66.7%) without pain preferred OVAMA (p=0.002). Additionally, patients with VMs involving the trunk or extremities (173/273, 63.4%) had significantly different preferences compared to those with VMs in the head or neck (p=0.017). Patients with the trunk or extremities VMs preferred PROVAM (35%) or expressed no preference (38.8%) over OVAMA (26%) (p=0.008, p=0.021).

Conclusion:

Both PROVAM and OVAMA are effective, validated tools for assessing HRQoL in patients with VMs, but with different focuses. PROVAM, with its emphasis on the multi-dimensional functional impact of VMs, is more suitable for patients experiencing pain and with VMs of the trunk and extremities, offering a more comprehensive evaluation of their overall quality of life. In contrast, OVAMA, with its focus on specific physical symptoms and appearance, is favored by patients without pain and is generally perceived as easier and quicker to complete. These findings highlight the potential benefits of tailoring the choice of questionnaire to individual patient profiles to optimize HRQoL assessments and enhance patient-centered care.