将残疾状况扩展量表与行走、视觉和认知测试相结合。

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Neurological Sciences Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-04-30 DOI:10.1007/s10072-024-07559-9
Alessio Sarnataro, Nunzia Cuomo, Cinzia Valeria Russo, Antonio Carotenuto, Roberta Lanzillo, Marcello Moccia, Maria Petracca, Vincenzo Brescia Morra, Francesco Saccà
{"title":"将残疾状况扩展量表与行走、视觉和认知测试相结合。","authors":"Alessio Sarnataro, Nunzia Cuomo, Cinzia Valeria Russo, Antonio Carotenuto, Roberta Lanzillo, Marcello Moccia, Maria Petracca, Vincenzo Brescia Morra, Francesco Saccà","doi":"10.1007/s10072-024-07559-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) is usually calculated through a neurological examination with self-reported performance. This may lead to incorrect assessment of Functional System scores (FSs). Aim of our study was to estimate the difference between EDSS obtained during routine visits, or after specific tests.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We enrolled 670 MS patients that underwent a regular neurology consultation, and visual evaluation using optotype tables, ambulation evaluation with a rodometer, and cognitive assessment with the Brief International Cognitive assessment for MS (BICAMS). We calculated a new integrated EDSS (iEDSS) using the refined values of the FS and compared it to the standard EDSS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Visual, cerebral and ambulation FSs were significantly higher compared with the self-reported counterpart [+ 1.169 (95%CI 1.077, 1.262; p < 0.001), + 0.727 (95%CI 0.653, 0.801; p < 0.001) and + 0.822 (95%CI 0.705, 0.939; p < 0.001), respectively]. Mean iEDSS was higher than EDSS (+ 0.642; p < 0.001). Visual acuity tests worsened the EDSS in 31% of cases, cognitive tests in 10%, ambulation measurement in 35%, all three measurements in 59% of cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Objective measurement of FSs results in a more accurate EDSS score in almost two-thirds of cases. This could lead to a more thorough evaluation of patients in the transition or progressive phase.</p>","PeriodicalId":19191,"journal":{"name":"Neurological Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11422431/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Integration of the expanded disability status scale with ambulation, visual and cognitive tests.\",\"authors\":\"Alessio Sarnataro, Nunzia Cuomo, Cinzia Valeria Russo, Antonio Carotenuto, Roberta Lanzillo, Marcello Moccia, Maria Petracca, Vincenzo Brescia Morra, Francesco Saccà\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10072-024-07559-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) is usually calculated through a neurological examination with self-reported performance. This may lead to incorrect assessment of Functional System scores (FSs). Aim of our study was to estimate the difference between EDSS obtained during routine visits, or after specific tests.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We enrolled 670 MS patients that underwent a regular neurology consultation, and visual evaluation using optotype tables, ambulation evaluation with a rodometer, and cognitive assessment with the Brief International Cognitive assessment for MS (BICAMS). We calculated a new integrated EDSS (iEDSS) using the refined values of the FS and compared it to the standard EDSS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Visual, cerebral and ambulation FSs were significantly higher compared with the self-reported counterpart [+ 1.169 (95%CI 1.077, 1.262; p < 0.001), + 0.727 (95%CI 0.653, 0.801; p < 0.001) and + 0.822 (95%CI 0.705, 0.939; p < 0.001), respectively]. Mean iEDSS was higher than EDSS (+ 0.642; p < 0.001). Visual acuity tests worsened the EDSS in 31% of cases, cognitive tests in 10%, ambulation measurement in 35%, all three measurements in 59% of cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Objective measurement of FSs results in a more accurate EDSS score in almost two-thirds of cases. This could lead to a more thorough evaluation of patients in the transition or progressive phase.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19191,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurological Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11422431/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurological Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-024-07559-9\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/4/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurological Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10072-024-07559-9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介扩展残疾状况量表(EDSS)通常是通过神经系统检查和自我报告的表现来计算的。这可能会导致对功能系统评分(FSs)的错误评估。我们的研究旨在估算常规就诊或特定检查后获得的 EDSS 之间的差异:我们招募了 670 名多发性硬化症患者,这些患者接受了神经内科的定期会诊、使用视力表进行的视力评估、使用计步器进行的行走评估以及使用多发性硬化症简易国际认知评估(BICAMS)进行的认知评估。我们使用FS的改进值计算了新的综合EDSS(iEDSS),并将其与标准EDSS进行了比较:结果:视觉、大脑和活动能力的 FS 值明显高于自我报告的 FS 值[+ 1.169 (95%CI 1.077, 1.262; p]:在近三分之二的病例中,对FSs进行客观测量可获得更准确的EDSS评分。这将有助于对处于过渡期或进展期的患者进行更全面的评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Integration of the expanded disability status scale with ambulation, visual and cognitive tests.

Introduction: The Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) is usually calculated through a neurological examination with self-reported performance. This may lead to incorrect assessment of Functional System scores (FSs). Aim of our study was to estimate the difference between EDSS obtained during routine visits, or after specific tests.

Methods: We enrolled 670 MS patients that underwent a regular neurology consultation, and visual evaluation using optotype tables, ambulation evaluation with a rodometer, and cognitive assessment with the Brief International Cognitive assessment for MS (BICAMS). We calculated a new integrated EDSS (iEDSS) using the refined values of the FS and compared it to the standard EDSS.

Results: Visual, cerebral and ambulation FSs were significantly higher compared with the self-reported counterpart [+ 1.169 (95%CI 1.077, 1.262; p < 0.001), + 0.727 (95%CI 0.653, 0.801; p < 0.001) and + 0.822 (95%CI 0.705, 0.939; p < 0.001), respectively]. Mean iEDSS was higher than EDSS (+ 0.642; p < 0.001). Visual acuity tests worsened the EDSS in 31% of cases, cognitive tests in 10%, ambulation measurement in 35%, all three measurements in 59% of cases.

Conclusions: Objective measurement of FSs results in a more accurate EDSS score in almost two-thirds of cases. This could lead to a more thorough evaluation of patients in the transition or progressive phase.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Neurological Sciences
Neurological Sciences 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
3.00%
发文量
743
审稿时长
4 months
期刊介绍: Neurological Sciences is intended to provide a medium for the communication of results and ideas in the field of neuroscience. The journal welcomes contributions in both the basic and clinical aspects of the neurosciences. The official language of the journal is English. Reports are published in the form of original articles, short communications, editorials, reviews and letters to the editor. Original articles present the results of experimental or clinical studies in the neurosciences, while short communications are succinct reports permitting the rapid publication of novel results. Original contributions may be submitted for the special sections History of Neurology, Health Care and Neurological Digressions - a forum for cultural topics related to the neurosciences. The journal also publishes correspondence book reviews, meeting reports and announcements.
期刊最新文献
Idiopathic extracranial internal carotid artery vasospasm: case report and systematic review. Correction to: Effectiveness of combined robotics and virtual reality on lower limb functional ability in stroke survivors: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Aberrant functional connectivity associated with drug response in patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy. A non-linear relationship between blood pressure and mild cognitive impairment in elderly individuals: A cohort study based on the Chinese longitudinal healthy longevity survey (CLHLS). Alterations in spatiotemporal characteristics of dynamic networks in juvenile myoclonic epilepsy.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1