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
Objectives: To determine whether quality of life complements traditional outcome measures in immune-mediated polyneuropathies using the Medical Outcome Study 36-item short-form health status scale (SF-36). The validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the SF-36 were also analyzed.
Methods: SF-36 and three other measures (Medical Research Council sumscore, sensory sumscore, and Hughes functional scale) were assessed in 114 stable patients (83 with Guillain–Barré syndrome (GBS), 23 with chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP), eight with a gammopathy-related polyneuropathy) and serially in 20 patients with recently diagnosed GBS (n = 7) or CIDP (n = 13) with changing conditions. The SF-36 values were compared with reported healthy Dutch community scores (controls). The SF-36 validity and reliability were examined by correlation and regression studies with the other measures and by calculating its internal consistency. The standardized response mean and effect size techniques were applied to determine its responsiveness.
Results: In the stable group, all SF-36 scores were substantially lower (indicating worse clinical condition) compared with control subjects (p < 0.0001). Improvement in the longitudinal group resulted in a gradual shift of all SF-36 scores toward normal values. Acceptable validity and internal consistency values and moderate to good standardized response mean and effect size scores were demonstrated for the SF-36. The Medical Research Council sumscore and sensory sumscore explained SF-36 values only partially.
Conclusion: The SF-36 as a generic health status complemented traditional strength and sensory measures in patients with immune-mediated polyneuropathies and appears to be a potentially valuable instrument for measuring quality of life in these conditions.
- Received July 24, 2000.
- Accepted in final form March 20, 2002.
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.
