Standardizing fatigue measurement in multiple sclerosis: the validity, responsiveness and score interpretation of the PROMIS SF v1.0 - Fatigue (MS) 8a.


Journal

Multiple sclerosis and related disorders
ISSN: 2211-0356
Titre abrégé: Mult Scler Relat Disord
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101580247

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Sep 2021
Historique:
received: 13 04 2021
revised: 21 06 2021
accepted: 24 06 2021
pubmed: 14 7 2021
medline: 6 10 2021
entrez: 13 7 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Fatigue is one of the most common and the single most disabling symptom of multiple sclerosis (MS). However, there is a lack of consensus on the most appropriate fatigue measures in clinical practice and research, based upon rigorously validated, generalizable, and publicly available instruments. The objective of this research was to generate additional evidence regarding the validity and applicability of the PROMIS SF v1.0 - Fatigue (MS) 8a, including content validity, reliability, construct validity and responsiveness, as well as to assess minimal important difference (MID) estimates and a score interpretation tool to aide meaningful individual level score interpretation. A mixed-methods, sequential design was followed. Cognitive debriefing (CD) interviews (n=29) were performed with MS patients, to assess the relevance and comprehensiveness of the PROMIS Fatigue (MS) 8a scores. To evaluate the psychometric properties of the PROMIS Fatigue (MS) 8a, two observational studies were conducted: a cross-sectional study at two US MS centers (n=296), and a 96-week longitudinal study in a UK MS Register cohort (n=384). Main outcomes and measures were estimates of known-groups validity, convergence validity, reliability, and responsiveness, a guide for interpreting PROMIS Fatigue (MS) 8a T-scores, and anchor-based MID estimates. The CD interviews confirmed the comprehensiveness and relevance of the PROMIS Fatigue (MS) 8a in assessing MS fatigue. Cronbach's alpha (>0.9) and intra-class correlation coefficient (≥0.9) for test-retest scores at 5-7 days follow-up, supported strong internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Hypothesized differences were found across patient groups in patient reported fatigue and related concepts (analysis of variance [ANOVA], P <0.001). PROMIS Fatigue (MS) 8a scores were sensitive to bi-directional changes in fatigue (GHS fatigue global question) and physical health (PROMIS GHS GPH), over a 52-week follow-up. Score changes of 3.4-4 points are proposed as MID criteria for minimal improvement or worsening in fatigue. This research extends the evidence supporting the content validity and the robust psychometric performance of the PROMIS Fatigue (MS) 8a across US and UK MS populations. Importantly, data supporting the measure's integration in clinical practice and research, including meaningful score interpretation, are now available.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Fatigue is one of the most common and the single most disabling symptom of multiple sclerosis (MS). However, there is a lack of consensus on the most appropriate fatigue measures in clinical practice and research, based upon rigorously validated, generalizable, and publicly available instruments. The objective of this research was to generate additional evidence regarding the validity and applicability of the PROMIS SF v1.0 - Fatigue (MS) 8a, including content validity, reliability, construct validity and responsiveness, as well as to assess minimal important difference (MID) estimates and a score interpretation tool to aide meaningful individual level score interpretation.
METHODS METHODS
A mixed-methods, sequential design was followed. Cognitive debriefing (CD) interviews (n=29) were performed with MS patients, to assess the relevance and comprehensiveness of the PROMIS Fatigue (MS) 8a scores. To evaluate the psychometric properties of the PROMIS Fatigue (MS) 8a, two observational studies were conducted: a cross-sectional study at two US MS centers (n=296), and a 96-week longitudinal study in a UK MS Register cohort (n=384). Main outcomes and measures were estimates of known-groups validity, convergence validity, reliability, and responsiveness, a guide for interpreting PROMIS Fatigue (MS) 8a T-scores, and anchor-based MID estimates.
RESULTS RESULTS
The CD interviews confirmed the comprehensiveness and relevance of the PROMIS Fatigue (MS) 8a in assessing MS fatigue. Cronbach's alpha (>0.9) and intra-class correlation coefficient (≥0.9) for test-retest scores at 5-7 days follow-up, supported strong internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Hypothesized differences were found across patient groups in patient reported fatigue and related concepts (analysis of variance [ANOVA], P <0.001). PROMIS Fatigue (MS) 8a scores were sensitive to bi-directional changes in fatigue (GHS fatigue global question) and physical health (PROMIS GHS GPH), over a 52-week follow-up. Score changes of 3.4-4 points are proposed as MID criteria for minimal improvement or worsening in fatigue.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
This research extends the evidence supporting the content validity and the robust psychometric performance of the PROMIS Fatigue (MS) 8a across US and UK MS populations. Importantly, data supporting the measure's integration in clinical practice and research, including meaningful score interpretation, are now available.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34256350
pii: S2211-0348(21)00384-9
doi: 10.1016/j.msard.2021.103117
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

103117

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Auteurs

Paul Kamudoni (P)

Global Evidence & Value Development, R&D, Merck Healthcare KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany. Electronic address: paul.kamudoni@merckgroup.com.

Jeffrey Johns (J)

Institute of Medicines Development, Cardiff, UK. Electronic address: jeffjohns99@hotmail.com.

Karon F Cook (KF)

Feral Scholars, Broaddus, Texas, USA. Electronic address: karon.cook@feralscholars.net.

Rana Salem (R)

Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. Electronic address: rsalem@uw.edu.

Sam Salek (S)

School of Life and Medical Sciences, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK. Electronic address: sssalek52@gmail.com.

Jana Raab (J)

Global Evidence & Value Development, R&D, Merck Healthcare KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany. Electronic address: jana.raab@merckgroup.com.

Rod Middleton (R)

UK MS Register, Swansea University Medical School, Swansea, UK. Electronic address: r.m.middleton@swansea.ac.uk.

Christian Henke (C)

Global Evidence & Value Development, R&D, Merck Healthcare KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany. Electronic address: christian.henke@merckgroup.com.

Pavle Repovic (P)

Swedish Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA. Electronic address: Pavle.Repovic@swedish.org.

Kevin Alschuler (K)

Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Neurology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. Electronic address: kalschul@uw.edu.

Gloria von Geldern (G)

Department of Neurology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. Electronic address: vgeldern@uw.edu.

Annette Wundes (A)

Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Department of Neurology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. Electronic address: awundes@uw.edu.

Dagmar Amtmann (D)

Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. Electronic address: dagmara@uw.edu.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH