Validity, reliability, and sensitivity to change of the myasthenia gravis activities of daily living profile in a sample of Italian myasthenic patients

被引:0
作者
Alberto Raggi
Carlo Antozzi
Fulvio Baggi
Matilde Leonardi
Lorenzo Maggi
Renato Mantegazza
机构
[1] Neurological Institute “C. Besta” IRCCS Foundation,Neurology, Public Health and Disability Unit
[2] Neurological Institute “C. Besta” IRCCS Foundation,Department of Neuroimmunology and Neuromuscular Disorders
来源
Neurological Sciences | 2017年 / 38卷
关键词
MG-ADL; Myasthenia gravis; Reliability; Validity; INCB-MG; WHODAS 2.0;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The purpose of this study is to report on the validity, reliability, and sensitivity of the myasthenia gravis activities of daily living profile (MG-ADL) in a sample of Italian patients. Patients with myasthenia gravis (MG) completed a protocol that included the MG-ADL, the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0), the Besta Neurological Institute rating scale for myasthenia gravis, and the MG-composite. Cronbach’s alpha was used to test reliability, Spearman’s correlation and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) to test short-term test-retest, Kruskal-Wallis test to assess differences in MG-ADL between patients with different disease severity, and Wilcoxon signed-rank test to assess sensitivity to change. In total, 58 patients were enrolled: 44 were females, mean MG duration 10.5 ± 10.4 years, mean MG-ADL 3.98 ± 3.07. The MG-ADL showed good internal consistency (alpha = .774), stability (test-retest correlation = .98, ICC = .97). It was superior to the WHODAS 2.0 in differentiating patients with different MG type and severity (P < .001), it showed higher sensitivity to change (P = .001 for improved and P = .007 for worsened patients) and higher correlation with the MG-composite (RHO = .625). Our analysis shows that the Italian version of the MG-ADL is valid, reliable, stable, and sensitive to change.
引用
收藏
页码:1927 / 1931
页数:4
相关论文
共 120 条
[1]  
Mantegazza R(2003)Myasthenia gravis (MG): epidemiological data and prognostic factors Ann N Y Acad Sci 998 413-423
[2]  
Baggi F(2001)Myasthenia gravis Lancet 357 2122-2128
[3]  
Antozzi C(2010)History of outcome measures for myasthenia gravis Muscle Nerve 42 5-13
[4]  
Confalonieri P(2014)Development of the MG-DIS: an ICF-based disability assessment instrument for myasthenia gravis Disabil Rehabil 36 546-555
[5]  
Morandi L(2012)The myasthenia gravis—specific activities of daily living profile Ann N Y Acad Sci 1274 114-119
[6]  
Bernasconi P(2011)MG-ADL: still a relevant outcome measure Muscle Nerve 44 727-731
[7]  
Andreetta F(2016)Major motor-functional determinants associated with poor self-reported health-related quality of life in myasthenia gravis patients Neurol Sci 37 717-723
[8]  
Simoncini O(2016)Randomized trial of thymectomy in myasthenia gravis N Engl J Med 375 511-522
[9]  
Campanella A(2008)An international, phase III, randomized trial of mycophenolate mofetil in myasthenia gravis Neurology 71 400-406
[10]  
Beghi E(2016)Validation of the Besta Neurological Institute rating scale for myasthenia gravis Muscle Nerve 53 32-37