학술논문

Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29): relation to established measures of impairment and disability.
Document Type
Article
Source
Multiple Sclerosis (13524585). Oct2004, Vol. 10 Issue 5, p569-574. 6p.
Subject
*MULTIPLE sclerosis
*VIRUS diseases
*HOSPITALS
*NEUROLOGY
*NEUROLOGICAL disorders
*PATIENTS
Language
ISSN
1352-4585
Abstract
Objective: To validate the newly developed Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29) in a large, well characterized, independent group of MS patients by investigating the relation between the MSIS-29 and the Guy's Neurological Disability Scale (GNDS), the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and the MS Functional Composite (MSFC). Methods: Two hundred MS patients were recruited at our outpatient department. At the same visit GNDS, EDSS, MSFC and MSIS-29 were assessed. Data obtained from GNDS, EDSS and MSFC assessment were compared to both physical and psychological impact scores of the MSIS-29. In addition the contribution of GNDS subcategories, EDSS functional systems and MSFC components to the physical and psychological impact scores of the MSIS-29 was studied. Results: Median scores were 37.5 for the physical and 22.2 for the psychological impact score of the MSIS-29, 13.0 for GNDS and 4.0 for EDSS. Mean MSFC was 0.07. The physical impact score showed good correlations with both GNDS (0.79) and EDSS (0.68) and a moderate correlation with the MSFC ( (-0.53). The psychological impact score showed weak correlations with EDSS (0.22) and MSFC ( (-0.30) and a moderately strong correlation with the GNDS (0.58). In 50 (25%) patients, scores on physical and psychological impact scales diverted, i. e., a relative high score on one scale combined with a relative low score on the other scale. This was related to the clinical disease course. Conclusion: Our study supports the use of the MSIS-29 as a measure for the assessment of physical impact of MS on normal daily life. In addition, our data provides a deeper understanding of the factors that determine both physical and psychological disease impact. Discrepancies between the latter two aspects deserve further attention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]