This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Abstract
Objective: To describe the results of a multicenter study that validated two new patient-reported measures of neurologic impairment and disability for use in MS clinical research.
Background: Self-reported data can provide a cost-effective means to assess patient functioning, and can be useful for screening patients who require additional evaluation.
Methods: Thirteen MS centers from the United States and Canada implemented a cross-sectional validation study of two new measures of neurologic function. The Symptom Inventory is a measure of neurologic impairment with six subscales designed to correlate with localization of brain lesion. The Performance Scales measure disability in eight domains of function: mobility, hand function, vision, fatigue, cognition, bladder/bowel, sensory, and spasticity. Measures given for comparison included a neurologic examination (Expanded Disability Status Scale, Ambulation Index, Disease Steps) as well as the patient-reported Health Status Questionnaire and the Quality of Well-being Index. Participants included 274 MS patients and 296 healthy control subjects who were matched to patients on age, gender, and education.
Results: Both the Symptom Inventory and the Performance Scales showed high test–retest and internal consistency reliability. Correlational analyses supported the construct validity of both measures. Discriminant function analysis reduced the Symptom Inventory to 29 items without sacrificing reliability and increased its discriminant validity. The Performance Scales explained more variance in clinical outcomes and global quality of life than the Symptom Inventory, and there was some evidence that the two measures complemented each other in predicting Quality of Well-being Index scores.
Conclusions: The Symptom Inventory and the Performance Scales are reliable and valid measures.
- Received February 26, 1998.
- Accepted September 19, 1998.
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
Letters: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
You must ensure that your Disclosures have been updated within the previous six months. Please go to our Submission Site to add or update your Disclosure information.
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.
