Multiple sclerosis functional tests and their comparability with self-administered values: A pilot study

Laura Estefanía Arenas-Vargas, Lorena López-Reyes, Simón Cárdenas-Robledo
{"title":"Multiple sclerosis functional tests and their comparability with self-administered values: A pilot study","authors":"Laura Estefanía Arenas-Vargas, Lorena López-Reyes, Simón Cárdenas-Robledo","doi":"10.7705/biomedica.6873","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Neurological impairment in multiple sclerosis is highly variable among patients and over time it is difficult to quantify. The Multiple Sclerosis Outcome Assessment Consortium established sensitive, cost-effective, clinically significant, and reproducible measures of different functional systems to measure outcomes in clinical trials. However, their use in clinical care routines is not widespread due to time and training constraints.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the self-administration feasibility of the timed 25-foot walking, symbol-digit-modality, and 9-peg hole tests in healthy individuals.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We performed a descriptive pilot study. Healthy individuals between 18 and 80 years of age were included. The Timed 25-Foot Walking Test (T25- FWT), the Symbol Digit Modality Test (SDMT), and the Nine-Hole Peg Test (9-HPT) (using the dominant and non-dominant hand) were administered by a trained physician, who also instructed the subjects about test self-administration. The correlation and agreement, between the guided and self-administered tests were assessed with Pearson and Spearman coefficients and the Bland-Altman method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-eight healthy volunteers were included. The median age was 36 (range: 23-55) years old, and 55.26% were female. The correlation coefficient between guided and selfadministered tests was 0.37 for the T25-FWT (p=0.01), 0.54 for the SDMT (p<0.001), and 0.64 and 0.65 for the 9-HPT, in the dominant and non-dominant hands, respectively (p<0,001). Both forms of administration were concordant for the T25-FWT (95%CI: -1,49 to 1,43), the 9-HPT with dominant hand (95%CI: -5,23 to 4,09), the 9-HPT with non-dominant hand (95%CI: -7,75 to 7,14) and the SDMT (95% CI: -20,94 to 24,10).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We provide a proof of concept related to the feasibility of the selfadministration of the T25-FWT, the 9-HPT, and the SDMT, as a tool to improve monitoring in routine clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":101322,"journal":{"name":"Biomedica : revista del Instituto Nacional de Salud","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10644983/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomedica : revista del Instituto Nacional de Salud","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7705/biomedica.6873","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Neurological impairment in multiple sclerosis is highly variable among patients and over time it is difficult to quantify. The Multiple Sclerosis Outcome Assessment Consortium established sensitive, cost-effective, clinically significant, and reproducible measures of different functional systems to measure outcomes in clinical trials. However, their use in clinical care routines is not widespread due to time and training constraints.

Objective: To evaluate the self-administration feasibility of the timed 25-foot walking, symbol-digit-modality, and 9-peg hole tests in healthy individuals.

Materials and methods: We performed a descriptive pilot study. Healthy individuals between 18 and 80 years of age were included. The Timed 25-Foot Walking Test (T25- FWT), the Symbol Digit Modality Test (SDMT), and the Nine-Hole Peg Test (9-HPT) (using the dominant and non-dominant hand) were administered by a trained physician, who also instructed the subjects about test self-administration. The correlation and agreement, between the guided and self-administered tests were assessed with Pearson and Spearman coefficients and the Bland-Altman method.

Results: Thirty-eight healthy volunteers were included. The median age was 36 (range: 23-55) years old, and 55.26% were female. The correlation coefficient between guided and selfadministered tests was 0.37 for the T25-FWT (p=0.01), 0.54 for the SDMT (p<0.001), and 0.64 and 0.65 for the 9-HPT, in the dominant and non-dominant hands, respectively (p<0,001). Both forms of administration were concordant for the T25-FWT (95%CI: -1,49 to 1,43), the 9-HPT with dominant hand (95%CI: -5,23 to 4,09), the 9-HPT with non-dominant hand (95%CI: -7,75 to 7,14) and the SDMT (95% CI: -20,94 to 24,10).

Conclusions: We provide a proof of concept related to the feasibility of the selfadministration of the T25-FWT, the 9-HPT, and the SDMT, as a tool to improve monitoring in routine clinical practice.

多发性硬化症的功能测试及其与自主管理价值观的可比性:一项试点研究。
介绍。多发性硬化症的神经功能损害对每个患者都是可变的,随着时间的推移,其量化变得困难。多发性硬化症结果评估联盟制定了敏感、成本有效和可复制的临床措施,以衡量临床研究的结果。然而,其参考值尚不清楚,在通常的护理中,由于时间和训练的限制,其使用并不广泛。目的:确定健康人自主进行25英尺、符号和数字、钉子和9个洞的步态测试的可行性。材料和方法。进行了一项描述性试点研究。包括18至80岁的健康个体。时间25英尺步行测试(T25-FWT)[25英尺计时步行]、符号数字模型测试(SDMT)[符号和数字]和九孔PEG测试(9-HPT)[钉子和九个洞]的测试由一名训练有素的医生进行,他还指导受试者自主管理测试。利用皮尔森和斯皮尔曼的系数以及布兰德-奥尔特曼的图形分析来评估引导测试和自主测试之间的相关性和一致性。结果:包括38名健康志愿者。中位年龄为36岁(范围:23-55岁),55.26%为女性。T25-FWT的指导给药试验与自主给药试验之间的相关系数为0.37(p=0.01),SDMT的相关系数为0.54(p结论:这项研究的结果有助于确定T25-FWT、9-HPT和SDMT试验获得的人群正常值;此外,它们还提供了自主练习的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信