Eduardo José Ferreira Santos, Bayram Farisogullari, Katie Fishpool, George Young, Coziana Ciurtin, Fiona Cramp, Emmanuel Oghenetejiri Erhieyovwe, Gary J Macfarlane, Jen Pearson, Emma Dures, Pedro M Machado
{"title":"Instruments for measuring fatigue in people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: a systematic review of measurement properties.","authors":"Eduardo José Ferreira Santos, Bayram Farisogullari, Katie Fishpool, George Young, Coziana Ciurtin, Fiona Cramp, Emmanuel Oghenetejiri Erhieyovwe, Gary J Macfarlane, Jen Pearson, Emma Dures, Pedro M Machado","doi":"10.1136/rmdopen-2025-006079","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To summarise the measurement properties of instruments used to assess fatigue in people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review (SR) of measurement properties was conducted in children, adolescents/young adults and adults with RMDs, following Joanna Briggs Institute and COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) guidelines. Searches were performed in Medline, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane Library. Risk of bias assessment, data extraction and synthesis were conducted independently by two reviewers. Instruments were assessed according to Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) criteria.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 16 657 records, 109 articles underwent full-text review, and 60 met inclusion criteria. These studies evaluated the psychometric properties of 27 instruments. Most studies focused on construct validity (54/60, 90%) and intermethod reliability (45/60, 75%), with an overall low risk of bias. In contrast, test-retest reliability (13/60, 21.7%) and responsiveness (14/60, 23.3%) were less frequently assessed, but also with an overall low risk of bias. Evidence regarding clinical trial discrimination and thresholds of meaningful change was limited or absent, indicating the need for further research in these domains. Only five instruments-the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Fatigue, the 36-Item Short Form Survey Instrument (SF-36) Vitality, the Bristol Rheumatoid Arthritis Fatigue Multi-Dimensional Questionnaire (BRAF-MDQ), the BRAF Numerical Rating Scales (BRAF-NRS) and the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS)-were rated as valid, reliable and low risk of bias, fulfilling OMERACT endorsement criteria.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This SR comprehensively supports the use of several well-validated instruments to assess fatigue, particularly FACIT-Fatigue, SF-36 Vitality, BRAF-MDQ, BRAF-NRS and FSS, in both clinical and research settings.</p><p><strong>Prospero registration number: </strong>CRD42024507112.</p>","PeriodicalId":21396,"journal":{"name":"RMD Open","volume":"11 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RMD Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/rmdopen-2025-006079","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To summarise the measurement properties of instruments used to assess fatigue in people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs).
Methods: A systematic review (SR) of measurement properties was conducted in children, adolescents/young adults and adults with RMDs, following Joanna Briggs Institute and COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) guidelines. Searches were performed in Medline, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane Library. Risk of bias assessment, data extraction and synthesis were conducted independently by two reviewers. Instruments were assessed according to Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) criteria.
Results: Out of 16 657 records, 109 articles underwent full-text review, and 60 met inclusion criteria. These studies evaluated the psychometric properties of 27 instruments. Most studies focused on construct validity (54/60, 90%) and intermethod reliability (45/60, 75%), with an overall low risk of bias. In contrast, test-retest reliability (13/60, 21.7%) and responsiveness (14/60, 23.3%) were less frequently assessed, but also with an overall low risk of bias. Evidence regarding clinical trial discrimination and thresholds of meaningful change was limited or absent, indicating the need for further research in these domains. Only five instruments-the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Fatigue, the 36-Item Short Form Survey Instrument (SF-36) Vitality, the Bristol Rheumatoid Arthritis Fatigue Multi-Dimensional Questionnaire (BRAF-MDQ), the BRAF Numerical Rating Scales (BRAF-NRS) and the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS)-were rated as valid, reliable and low risk of bias, fulfilling OMERACT endorsement criteria.
Conclusions: This SR comprehensively supports the use of several well-validated instruments to assess fatigue, particularly FACIT-Fatigue, SF-36 Vitality, BRAF-MDQ, BRAF-NRS and FSS, in both clinical and research settings.
期刊介绍：
RMD Open publishes high quality peer-reviewed original research covering the full spectrum of musculoskeletal disorders, rheumatism and connective tissue diseases, including osteoporosis, spine and rehabilitation. Clinical and epidemiological research, basic and translational medicine, interesting clinical cases, and smaller studies that add to the literature are all considered.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
