Do patient and proxy agree? Long-term changes in multiple sclerosis physical impact and walking ability on patient-reported outcome scales

Multiple Sclerosis Journal

Volumn 20, Issue 12, 2014, Pages 1616-1623

  Sonder, Judith M ^a   Balk, Lisanne J ^a   Bosma, Libertje V A E ^a   Polman, Chris H ^a   Uitdehaag, Bernard M J ^a  

^a VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

anxiety and depression; caregiver burden; Multiple sclerosis; outcome measurement; patient reported outcome; proxy

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE; AGED; ANXIETY; ARTICLE; CAREGIVER BURDEN; DEPRESSION; DISEASE DURATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS IMPACT SCALE; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS WALKING SCALE; PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOME SCALE; PROXY; RATING SCALE; WALKING; CONTROLLED STUDY; FOLLOW UP; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS IMPACT SCALE 29; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS WALKING SCALE 12; NEUROLOGIC DISEASE ASSESSMENT; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOME; PHYSICAL PERFORMANCE; PROSPECTIVE STUDY;

EID: 84910132494     PISSN: 13524585     EISSN: 14770970     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1352458514529173     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Schäffler N, Schönberg P, Stephan J, et al. Comparison of patient-reported outcome measures in multiple sclerosis. Acta Neurol Scand. 2013 ; 128: 114-121
2. Bosma L, Kragt JJ, Polman CH, et al. Walking speed, rather than Expanded Disability Status Scale, relates to long-term patient-reported impact in progressive MS. Mult Scler. 2013 ; 19: 326-333
3. Giordano A, Pucci E, Naldi P, et al. Responsiveness of patient reported outcome measures in multiple sclerosis relapses: The REMS study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2009 ; 80: 1023-1028
4. McKenna SP, Doward LC, Twiss J, et al. International development of the patient-reported outcome indices for multiple sclerosis (PRIMUS). Value Health. 2010 ; 13: 946-951
5. Twiss J, Doward LC, McKenna SP, et al. Interpreting scores on multiple sclerosis-specific patient reported outcome measures (the PRIMUS and U-FIS). Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2010 ; 8: 117
6. Riazi A. Patient-reported outcome measures in multiple sclerosis. Int MS J. 2006 ; 13: 92-99
7. Benedict RH, Munschauer F, Linn R, et al. Screening for multiple sclerosis cognitive impairment using a self-administered 15-item questionnaire. Mult Scler. 2003 ; 9: 95-101
8. Sonder JM, Mokkink LB, van der Linden FA, et al. Validation and interpretation of the Dutch version of the Multiple Sclerosis Neuropsychological Screening Questionnaire. J Neurol Sci. 2012 ; 320: 91-96
9. van der Linden FA, Kragt JJ, Klein M, et al. Psychometric evaluation of the multiple sclerosis impact scale (MSIS-29) for proxy use. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2005 ; 76: 1677-1681
10. Hobart J, Lamping D, Fitzpatrick R, et al. The Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29): A new patient-based outcome measure. Brain. 2001 ; 124: 962-973
11. Carone DA, Benedict RH, Munschauer FE, et al. Interpreting patient/informant discrepancies of reported cognitive symptoms in MS. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2005 ; 11: 574-583
12. 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: 31-36
13. Sonder J, Bosma L, van der Linden F, et al. Proxy measurements in multiple sclerosis: Agreement on different patient-reported outcome scales. Mult Scler. 2012 ; 18: 196-201
14. Sonder JM, Holman R, Knol DL, et al. Analyzing differences between patient and proxy on patient reported outcomes in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Sci. 2013 ; 334: 143-147
15. McGuigan C, Hutchinson M. Confirming the validity and responsiveness of the Multiple Sclerosis Walking Scale-12 (MSWS-12). Neurology. 2004 ; 62: 2103-2105
16. Motl RW, Snook EM. Confirmation and extension of the validity of the Multiple Sclerosis Walking Scale-12 (MSWS-12). J Neurol Sci. 2008 ; 268: 69-73
17. Motl RW, McAuley E, Mullen S. Longitudinal measurement invariance of the Multiple Sclerosis Walking Scale-12. J Neurol Sci. 2011 ; 305: 75-79
18. 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
19. Hoogervorst EL, Zwemmer JN, Jelles B, et al. Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29): Relation to established measures of impairment and disability. Mult Scler. 2004 ; 10: 569-574
20. McGuigan C, Hutchinson M. The Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29) is a reliable and sensitive measure. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2004 ; 75: 266-269
21. Riazi A, Hobart JC, Lamping DL, et al. Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29): Reliability and validity in hospital based samples. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2002 ; 73: 701-704
22. Polman CH, Reingold SC, Edan G, et al. Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2005 revisions to the "McDonald Criteria". Ann Neurol. 2005 ; 58: 840-846
23. Poser CM, Paty DW, Scheinberg L, et al. New diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: Guidelines for research protocols. Ann Neurol. 1983 ; 13: 227-231
24. Hobart JC, Riazi A, Lamping DL, et al. Improving the evaluation of therapeutic interventions in multiple sclerosis: Development of a patient-based measure of outcome. Health Technol Assess. 2004 ; 8: iii: 1-48
25. Costelloe L, O'Rourke K, Kearney H, et al. The patient knows best: Significant change in the physical component of the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29 physical). J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2007 ; 78: 841-844
26. Kurtzke JF. Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: An Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). Neurology. 1983 ; 33: 1444-1452
27. Lechner-Scott J, Kappos L, Hofman M, et al. Can the Expanded Disability Status Scale be assessed by telephone?. Mult Scler. 2003 ; 9: 154-159
28. Spinhoven P, Ormel J, Sloekers PP, et al. A validation study of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) in different groups of Dutch subjects. Psychol Med. 1997 ; 27: 363-370
29. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1983 ; 67: 361-370
30. Robinson BC. Validation of a Caregiver Strain Index. J Gerontol. 1983 ; 38: 344-348
31. van Exel NJ, Scholte op Reimer WJ, Brouwer WB, et al. Instruments for assessing the burden of informal caregiving for stroke patients in clinical practice: A comparison of CSI, CRA, SCQ and self-rated burden. Clin Rehabil. 2004 ; 18: 203-214
32. Schwartz L, Kraft GH. The role of spouse responses to disability and family environment in multiple sclerosis. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1999 ; 78: 525-532
33. Pozzilli C, Brunetti M, Amicosante AM, et al. Home based management in multiple sclerosis: Results of a randomised controlled trial. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2002 ; 73: 250-255
34. Aronson KJ. Quality of life among persons with multiple sclerosis and their caregivers. Neurology. 1997 ; 48: 74-80
35. Schwartz CE, Sprangers MA. Methodological approaches for assessing response shift in longitudinal health-related quality-of-life research. Soc Sci Med. 1999 ; 48: 1531-1548