Middle-range scores from the patient determined disease steps scale reflect varying levels of walking dysfunction in multiple sclerosis.
Multiple sclerosis
Neurological disability
Neurological disease
Patient reported Outcome measure
Validity
Walking
Journal
BMC neurology
ISSN: 1471-2377
Titre abrégé: BMC Neurol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968555
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 Oct 2024
10 Oct 2024
Historique:
received:
09
05
2024
accepted:
19
09
2024
medline:
11
10
2024
pubmed:
11
10
2024
entrez:
10
10
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a leading cause of neurological disability among young and middle-aged adults worldwide, and disability is measured using a variety of approaches, including patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) such as the Patient Determined Disease Steps (PDDS) scale. There is limited evidence for the validity of inferences from the middle-range of scores on the PDDS (i.e., 3 "gait disability" - 6 "bilateral support"), but that range of scores seemingly represents moderate disability characterized by varying levels of walking dysfunction. The current study examined whether the middle-range of scores from the PDDS reflect varying levels of walking dysfunction among people with MS. Participants (N = 374) completed the Patient Determined Disease Steps (PDDS) scale, Multiple Sclerosis Walking Scale-12 (MSWS-12), timed 25-foot walk (T25FW), six-minute walk (6 MW), Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS), and Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29 (MSIS-29), and underwent a neurological exam for generating an Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score as part of screening and baseline data collection for a clinical trial of exercise training in MS. We undertook a series of linear trend analyses that examined differences in the outcomes of EDSS, T25FW, 6 MW, MSWS-12, MFIS subscales, and MSIS-29 subscales across the 4 levels of PDDS scores (i.e., 3-6). There were statistically significant and strong linear trends for EDSS (F The PDDS could serve as a simple, inexpensive, and rapidly administered PROM for remote screening and early detection of walking dysfunction for initial eligibility into clinical trials and practice for managing mobility-specific disability in MS. The study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov on March 19, 2018 (NCT03468868).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a leading cause of neurological disability among young and middle-aged adults worldwide, and disability is measured using a variety of approaches, including patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) such as the Patient Determined Disease Steps (PDDS) scale. There is limited evidence for the validity of inferences from the middle-range of scores on the PDDS (i.e., 3 "gait disability" - 6 "bilateral support"), but that range of scores seemingly represents moderate disability characterized by varying levels of walking dysfunction.
PURPOSE
OBJECTIVE
The current study examined whether the middle-range of scores from the PDDS reflect varying levels of walking dysfunction among people with MS.
METHOD
METHODS
Participants (N = 374) completed the Patient Determined Disease Steps (PDDS) scale, Multiple Sclerosis Walking Scale-12 (MSWS-12), timed 25-foot walk (T25FW), six-minute walk (6 MW), Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS), and Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29 (MSIS-29), and underwent a neurological exam for generating an Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score as part of screening and baseline data collection for a clinical trial of exercise training in MS. We undertook a series of linear trend analyses that examined differences in the outcomes of EDSS, T25FW, 6 MW, MSWS-12, MFIS subscales, and MSIS-29 subscales across the 4 levels of PDDS scores (i.e., 3-6).
RESULTS
RESULTS
There were statistically significant and strong linear trends for EDSS (F
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The PDDS could serve as a simple, inexpensive, and rapidly administered PROM for remote screening and early detection of walking dysfunction for initial eligibility into clinical trials and practice for managing mobility-specific disability in MS.
REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
The study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov on March 19, 2018 (NCT03468868).
Identifiants
pubmed: 39390466
doi: 10.1186/s12883-024-03871-1
pii: 10.1186/s12883-024-03871-1
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03468868']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
383Subventions
Organisme : Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
ID : MS-1610-36999
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Segal BM. 66 – multiple sclerosis. In: Rich RR, Fleisher TA, Shearer WT, Schroeder HW, Frew AJ, Weyand CM, editors. Clinical immunology: principles and practice. 5th ed. Elsevier; 2019. pp. 891–e9021.
Kieseier BC, Pozzilli C. Assessing walking disability in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2012;18:914–24.
doi: 10.1177/1352458512444498
pubmed: 22740603
Rizzo MA, Hadjimichael O, Preiningerova J, et al. Pravelence and treatment of spasticity reported by multiple sclerosis patients. Mult Scler. 2004;10:589–95.
doi: 10.1191/1352458504ms1085oa
pubmed: 15471378
Hohol MJ, Orav EJ, Weiner HL. Disease steps in multiple sclerosis: a simple approach to evaluate disease progression. Neurology. 1995;45:251–5.
doi: 10.1212/WNL.45.2.251
pubmed: 7854521
Marrie RA, Cutter G, Tyry T, et al. Does multiple sclerosis-associated disability differ between. Races? Neurol. 2006;66:1235–40.
doi: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000208505.81912.82
Marrie RA, Horwitz R, Cutter G, et al. Comorbidity delays diagnosis and increases disability at diagnosis in MS. Neurology. 2009;72:117–24.
doi: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000333252.78173.5f
pubmed: 18971448
pmcid: 2677495
Foong YC, Merlo D, Gresle M, et al. The patient-determined disease steps scale is not interchangeable with the expanded Disease Status Scale in mild to moderate multiple sclerosis. Eur J Neurol. 2024;31:e16046.
doi: 10.1111/ene.16046
pubmed: 37584176
Marrie RA, McFadyen C, Yaeger L, et al. A systematic review of the validity and reliability of the patient-determined disease steps scale. Int J MS Care. 2023;25:20–5.
doi: 10.7224/1537-2073.2021-102
Messick S. Validity of psychological assessment: validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. Am Psychol. 1995;50:741–9.
doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.50.9.741
Confavreux C, Vukusic S, Moreau T, et al. Relapses and progression of disability in multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med. 2000;343:1430–80.
doi: 10.1056/NEJM200011163432001
pubmed: 11078767
Confavreux C, Vukusic S, Adeleine P. Early clinical predictors and progression of irreversible disability in multiple sclerosis: an amnesic process. Brain. 2003;126:770–82.
doi: 10.1093/brain/awg081
pubmed: 12615637
Goldman MD, Motl RW, Rudick RA. Possible clinical outcome measures for clinical trials in patients with multiple sclerosis. Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2010;3:229–39.
doi: 10.1177/1756285610374117
pubmed: 21179614
pmcid: 3002657
Baird JF, Sandroff BM, Motl RW. Therapies for mobility disability in persons with multiple sclerosis. Expert Rev Neurother. 2018;18:493–502.
doi: 10.1080/14737175.2018.1478289
pubmed: 29772185
pmcid: 6291756
Motl RW, Backus D, Neal WN, et al. Rationale and design of the STEP for MS Trial: comparative effectiveness of supervised versus Telerehabilitation Exercise Programs for multiple sclerosis. Contemp Clin Trials. 2019;81:110–22.
doi: 10.1016/j.cct.2019.04.013
pubmed: 31022481
Hobart JC, Riazi A, Lamping DL, et al. Measuring the impact of MS on walking ability: the 12-item MS walking scale (MSWS-12). Neurology. 2003;60:31–6.
doi: 10.1212/WNL.60.1.31
pubmed: 12525714
Motl RW, Cohen JA, Benedict R, et al. Validity of the timed 25-foot walk as an ambulatory performance outcome measure for multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler. 2017;23:704–10.
doi: 10.1177/1352458517690823
pubmed: 28206828
pmcid: 5405807
Goldman MD, Marrie RA, Cohen JA. Evaluation of the six-minute walk in multiple sclerosis subjects and healthy controls. Mult Scler. 2008;14:383–90.
doi: 10.1177/1352458507082607
pubmed: 17942508
Kurtzke JF. Rating neurological impairment in multiple sclerosis: an expanded disability status scale (EDSS). Neurology. 1983;33:1444–52.
doi: 10.1212/WNL.33.11.1444
pubmed: 6685237
Ritvo PG, Fischer JS, Miller DM, et al. MSQLI: multiple sclerosis quality of Life Inventory: a user’s Manual. New York, NY: National Multiple Sclerosis Society; 1997.
Hobart J, Lamping D, Fitzpatrick R, et al. The multiple sclerosis impact scale (MSIS-29): a new patient-based outcome measure. Brain. 2001;124:962–73.
doi: 10.1093/brain/124.5.962
pubmed: 11335698
Cohen J. A power primer. Psychol Bull. 1992;112:155–9.
doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155
pubmed: 19565683
Henning DA, Edwards EM, Ansara M, et al. Validating the walking while talking test to measure motor, cognitive, and dual-task performance in ambulatory individuals with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2021;54:102123.
doi: 10.1016/j.msard.2021.103123
Sandroff BM, Pilutti LA, Dlugonski D, et al. Comparing two conditions of administering the six-minute walk test in people with multiple sclerosis. Int J MS Care. 2014;16:48–54.
doi: 10.7224/1537-2073.2013-014
pubmed: 24688354
pmcid: 3967703
Skjerbaek AG, Dalgsa U, Stenagar E, et al. The six-spot step test is superior in detecting walking capacity impairments compared with short- and long-distance walk tests in persons with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler J Exp Transl Clin. 2023;9:20552173231218127.
pubmed: 38105806
pmcid: 10722939
Learmonth YC, Motl RW, Sandroff BM, et al. Validation of patient determined disease steps (PDDS) scale scores in persons with multiple sclerosis. BMC Neurol. 2013;13:37.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2377-13-37
pubmed: 23617555
pmcid: 3651716