Measuring deterioration in international classification of functioning domains of people with multiple sclerosis who are ambulatory

Physical Therapy

Volumn 88, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 176-190

  Paltamaa, Jaana ^a,b   Sarasoja, Taneli ^a   Leskinen, Esko ^b   Wikström, Juhani ^c   Mälkiä, Esko ^b  

^a Central Hospital   (Finland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF JYVÄSKYLÄ   (Finland)

^c UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BOX AND BLOCK TEST SCORE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT TOOL; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; DETERIORATION; DISTRIBUTION BASED RESPONSIVENESS; EXPANDED DISABILITY STATUS SCALE; FEMALE; FINLAND; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; FUNCTIONAL STATUS; HEART RATE; HUMAN; INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF FUNCTIONING, DISABILITY AND HEALTH; LIFE EVENT; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MINIMAL DETECTABLE CHANGE; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PARAMETER; PATIENT MOBILITY; PERCEPTION; PHYSIOTHERAPY; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; SCORING SYSTEM; SELF CARE; SELF REPORT; WALKING; WALKING SPEED;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; ADULT; AGED; DISABLED PERSONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; QUESTIONNAIRES; ROC CURVE; SELF CARE; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC;

EID: 38849117810     PISSN: 00319023     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2522/ptj.20070064     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Guyatt GH, Osoba D, Wu AW, et al. Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measurement. Mayo Clin Proc. 2002;77:371-383.
2. McHorney CA. Health status assessment methods for adults: past accomplishments and future challenges. Annu Rev Public Health. 1999;20:309-335.
3. Haley SM, Fragala-Pinkham MA. Interpreting change scores of tests and measures used in physical therapy. Phys Ther. 2006;86:735-743.
4. de Groot V, Beckerman H, Uitdehaag BMJ, et al. The usefulness of evaluative outcome measures in patients with multiple sclerosis. Brain. 2006;129:2648-2659.
5. Lohr KN. Assessing health status and quality-of life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res. 2002;11:193-205.
6. Crosby RD, Kolotkin RL, Williams GR. Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56:395-407.
7. Hobart JC, Riazi A, Lamping DL, et al. How responsive is the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29)? A comparison with some other self-report scales. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2005;76:1539-1543.
8. Pfennings LEMA, van der Ploeg HM, Cohen L, Polman CH. A comparison of responsiveness indices in multiple sclerosis patients. Qual Life Res. 1999;8:481-489.
9. Sharrack B, Hughes R, Soudain S, Dunn G. The psychometric properties of clinical rating scales used in multiple sclerosis. Brain. 1999;122:141-159.
10. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF. Geneva, Switzerland; World Health Organization; 2001.
11. Sarasoja T, Wikström J, Paltamaa J, et al. Occurrence of multiple sclerosis in central Finland: a regional and temporal comparison during 30 years. Acta Neurol Scand. 2004;110:331-336.
12. Paltamaa J, Sarasoja T, Wikström J, Mälkiä E. Physical functioning in subjects with multiple sclerosis: a population-based study in Central Finland. J Rehabil Med. 2006;38:339-345.
13. Kurtzke JF. Rating neurological impairment in multiple sclerosis: an expanded disability status scale (EDSS). Neurology. 1983;33:1444-1452.
14. Paltamaa J, West H, Sarasoja T, et al. Reliability of physical functioning measures in ambulatory subjects with multiple sclerosis [published erratum appears in Physiother Res Int. 2006;11:123]. Physiother Res Int. 2005;10:93-109.
15. Jette AM, Davies AR, Cleary PD, et al. The Functional Status Questionnaire: reliability and validity when used in primary care. J Gen Intern Med. 1986;1:143-149.
16. Murphy N, Confavreux C, Haas J, et al. Quality of life in multiple sclerosis in France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1998;65:460-466.
17. Cleary PD, Jette AM. Reliability and validity of the Functional Status Questionnaire. Qual Life Res. 2000;9:747-753.
18. Mathiowetz V, Volland G, Kashman N, Weber K. Adult norms for Box and Block Test for manual dexterity. Am J Occup Ther. 1985;39:386-391.
19. Berg K, Wood-Dauphinée S, Williams H, Gayton D. Measuring balance in the elderly: preliminary development of an instrument. Physiother Can. 1989;41:304-311.
20. Vaara M. Reliability of novel coordination and balance tests. Abstract presented at: 14th International Congress of the World Confederation for Physical Therapy; June 7-12, 2003; Barcelona, Spain.
21. Era P, Schroll M, Ytting H, et al. Postural balance and its sensorimotor correlates in 75-year-old men and women: a cross-national comparative study. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 1996;51:M53-M63.
22. Craik RL, Dutterer L. Spatial and temporal characteristics of foot fall patterns. In: Craik RL, Oatis CA, eds. Gait Analysis: Theory and Application. St Louis, Mo: Mosby-Year Book; 1995:143-158.
23. Kokko S-M, Paltamaa J, Ahola E, Mälkiä E. The assessment of functional ability in patients with Parkinson's disease: the PLM test and three clinical tests. Physiother Res Int. 1997;2:29-45.
24. Guyatt GH, Pugsley SO, Sullivan MJ, et al. Effect of encouragement on walking test performance. Thorax. 1984;39:818-822.
25. Guyatt GH, Sullivan MJ, Thompson PJ, et al. The 6-minute walk: a new measure of exercise capacity in patients with chronic heart failure. Can Med Assoc J. 1985;132:919-923.
26. Nene AV. Physiological cost index of walking in able bodied adolescents and adults. Clin Rehabil. 1993;7:319-326.
27. Borg G. Perceived exertion as an indicator of somatic stress. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1970;2:92-98.
28. Sekiya N, Nagasaki H. Reproducibility of the walking patterns of normal young adults: test-retest reliability of the walk ratio (step-length/step-rate). Gait Posture. 1998;7:225-227.
29. Mathiowetz V, Kashman N, Volland G, et al. Grip and pinch strength: normative data for adults. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1985;66:69-74.
30. Häkkinen A, Hannonen P, Häkkinen K. Muscle strength in healthy people and in patients suffering from recent-onset inflammatory arthritis. Br J Rheumatol. 1995:34:355-360.
31. Alaranta H, Hurri H, Heliövaara M, et al. Non-dynamometric trunk performance tests: reliability and normative data. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1994;26:211-215.
32. Bohannon RW, Smith MB. Interrater reliability of a modified Ashworth scale of muscle spasticity. Phys Ther. 1987;67:206-207.
33. Gajdosik RL, Rieck MA, Sullivan DK, Wightman SE. Comparison of four clinical tests for assessing hamstring muscle length. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1993;18:614-618.
34. Hays RD, Sherbourne CD, Mazel R. The RAND 36-Item Health Survey 1.0. Health Econ. 1993;2:217-227.
35. Noseworthy JH, Vandervoort MK, Wong CJ, Ebers GC. Interrater variability with the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and functional systems (FS) in a multiple sclerosis clinical trial. Neurology. 1990;40:971-975.
36. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology. 1982;143:29-36.
37. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Katz JN, Wright JG. A taxonomy for responsiveness. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001;54:1204-1217.
38. Wyrwich KW, Tierney WM, Wolisky FD. Further evidence supporting an SEM-based criterion for identifying meaningful intra-individual changes in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol. 1999;52:861-873.
39. Stratford PW, Binkey FM, Riddle DH. Health status measure: strategies and analytic methods for assessing change scores. Phys Ther. 1996;76:1109-1123.
40. Gold SM, Schultz H, Mönch A, et al. Cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis does not affect reliability and validity of self-report health measures. Mult Scler. 2003;9:404-410.
41. Martin CL, Phillips BA, Kilpatrick TJ, et al. Gait and balance impairment in early multiple sclerosis in the absence of clinical disability. Mult Scler. 2006;12:620-628.
42. Confavreux C, Vukusic S, Adeleine P. Early clinical predictors and progression of irreversible disability in multiple sclerosis: an amnesic process. Brain. 2003;126:770-782.
43. Cella D, Hahn EA, Dineen K. Meaningful change in cancer-specific quality of life scores: differences between improvement and worsening. Qual Life Res. 2002;11:207-221.
44. Kaufman M, Mover D, Norton J. The significant chance for the timed 25-foot walk in the multiple sclerosis functional composite. Mult Scler. 2000;6:286-290.
45. Vaney C, Vaney S, Wade DT. SaGAS, the short and graphic ability score: an alternative scoring method for the motor components of the multiple sclerosis functional composite. Mult Scler. 2004;10:231-242.
46. Lim L, van Wegen E, de Goede C, et al. Measuring gait and gait-related activities in Parkinson's patients' own home environment: a reliability, responsiveness and feasibility study. Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2005;11:19-24.
47. Stevenson TJ. Detecting change in patients with stroke using the Berg Balance Scale. Aust J Physiother. 2001;47:29-38.
48. Kwakkel G, Kollen BJ, Wagenaar RC. Long-term effects of intensity of upper and lower limb training after stroke: a randomised trial. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2002;72:473-479.
49. Finger ME, Cieza A, Stoll J, Stucki G, Huber EO. Identification of intervention categories for physical therapy, based on the International Classification of Functioning. Disability and Health: a Delphi exercise. Phys Ther. 2006;86:1203-1220.