SAGE Journals Online
Advertisement
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Advertisement

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Multiple Sclerosis
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
1352458507081274v1
14/2/255    most recent
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Costelloe, L.
Right arrow Articles by Hutchinson, M
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Costelloe, L.
Right arrow Articles by Hutchinson, M
Right arrowPubmed/NCBI databases
Medline Plus Health Information
*Multiple Sclerosis
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Article

The longitudinal relationship between the patient-reported Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale and the clinician-assessed Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite

Lisa Costelloe1*, K O'Rourke1, C McGuigan1, C Walsh2, N. Tubridy1, and M Hutchinson1

1 Department of Neurology, St.Vincent's University Hospital, Dublin 4, Ireland
2 Department of Statistics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.


  Abstract

Background To examine the longitudinal relationship between the patient-rated Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29) and the doctor-reported Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite (MSFC).

Methods Two-hundred and four MS patients at baseline and 150 patients one to three years later had MSFC and MSIS-29 assessments. Cross-sectional correlations between these measures and correlations of change in scores were examined. Minimally important change (MIC) in the MSFC was defined at either 0.5 or 0.32 SD from baseline. Effect sizes (ES) were calculated.

Results Validity: The MSIS-29 physical correlated moderately with the total MSFC score and the 25-foot timed walk and 9-hole peg test. Correlations of the MSIS-29 physical with the PASAT, and the MSFC with the MSIS-29 psychological were weak. Responsiveness: When MIC in the MSFC was defined as 0.5, mean MSIS-29 physical change was 11.26 (ES = 0.53). At MSFC change of 0.32, mean MSIS-29 physical change was 10.4 (ES = 0.52). Change in MSFC scores correlated weakly with change in the MSIS-29 scores. Stability: In patients with stable MSFC scores, the mean MSIS-29 physical scores improved minimally over time with negligible ES.

Conclusions Although the MSIS-29 physical demonstrates moderate cross-sectional correlation with the MSFC, the weak correlations of change scores between the two instruments indicate that they measure different aspects of the effects of multiple sclerosis morbidity.

Key Words: disability scales; multiple sclerosis; Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite; Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale; self-report measures

First published on October 17, 2007, doi:10.1177/1352458507081274

Multiple Sclerosis 2008;14:255.

A more recent version of this article appeared on March 1, 2008

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?




Advertisement