Psychometric evaluation of the multiple sclerosis impact scale (MSIS-29) for proxy use

Background: There may be difficulties in the use of self report measurements in patients with cognitive impairment or serious mood disturbances which interfere with reliable self assessment, as may be the case in multiple sclerosis (MS). In such cases proxies may provide valuable information. However, before using any questionnaires in a proxy sample, the questionnaire should be evaluated for proxy use. Objective: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the 29 item Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29) when used by proxies of MS patients. Methods: A sample of 62 partners of MS patients completed the MSIS-29. The data were evaluated for the psychometric criteria of the MSIS-29, including data quality, scaling assumptions, acceptability, reliability, validity, and responsiveness. Results: Psychometric evaluation was satisfactory; data quality was high, and scaling assumptions and acceptability were good. Reliability was high (α>0.80). Findings were consistent with results of a psychometric evaluation in a patient sample. Conclusions: The MSIS-29 can be used reliably in proxies of patients with MS. As a next step the relation between data obtained from patients and proxies needs to be studied, focusing on factors that may affect agreement and discrepancies.

[1]  J. DeLuca,et al.  The relationship between self-awareness of neurobehavioral symptoms, cognitive functioning, and emotional symptoms in multiple sclerosis , 2005, Multiple sclerosis.

[2]  R. Benedict,et al.  Reliable screening for neuropsychological impairment in multiple sclerosis , 2004, Multiple sclerosis.

[3]  A. Thompson,et al.  Improving the evaluation of therapeutic interventions in multiple sclerosis: development of a patient-based measure of outcome. , 2004, Health technology assessment.

[4]  R. Benedict,et al.  Validity of the Beck Depression Inventory-Fast Screen in multiple sclerosis , 2003, Multiple sclerosis.

[5]  A. Thompson,et al.  Evidence-based measurement in multiple sclerosis: the psychometric properties of the physical and psychological dimensions of three quality of life rating scales , 2003, Multiple sclerosis.

[6]  S. Gold,et al.  Cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis does not affect reliability and validity of self-report health measures , 2003, Multiple sclerosis.

[7]  R. Benedict,et al.  Screening for multiple sclerosis cognitive impairment using a self-administered 15-item questionnaire , 2003, Multiple sclerosis.

[8]  A. Thompson,et al.  Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29): reliability and validity in hospital based samples , 2002, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[9]  B. Saletu,et al.  Depression and quality of life in multiple sclerosis , 2001, Acta neurologica Scandinavica.

[10]  Y. Maor,et al.  The relation between objective and subjective impairment in cognitive function among multiple sclerosis patients - the role of depression , 2001, Multiple sclerosis.

[11]  M. Hanita Self-report measures of patient utility: should we trust them? , 2000, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[12]  P. Kenealy,et al.  Autobiographical Memory, Depression and Quality of Life in Multiple Sclerosis , 2000, Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology.

[13]  G. Regehr,et al.  Methodological problems in the retrospective computation of responsiveness to change: the lesson of Cronbach. , 1997, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[14]  N. Aaronson,et al.  The role of health care providers and significant others in evaluating the quality of life of patients with chronic disease: A review , 1992 .

[15]  Stephen M. Rao,et al.  Cognitive dysfunction in multiple sclerosis. , 1991, Neurology.

[16]  N. Aaronson,et al.  The role of health care providers and significant others in evaluating the quality of life of patients with chronic disease. , 2002, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[17]  J. Kleijnen,et al.  General health status measures for people with cognitive impairment: learning disability and acquired brain injury. , 2001, Health technology assessment.

[18]  G H Guyatt,et al.  Determining a minimal important change in a disease-specific Quality of Life Questionnaire. , 1994, Journal of clinical epidemiology.