PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 7854521

Disease steps in multiple sclerosis: a simple approach to evaluate disease progression.

Abstract

Current clinical scales in multiple sclerosis (MS) are often complicated to administer, suffer from interrater variability and lack of uniform representation across grades, and are insensitive to progression at certain stages. Furthermore, they are not easily applied by neurologists and do not clearly differentiate among functional stages of MS. For these reasons, we developed Disease Steps to assess disability in MS. A total of 1,323 patients were classified using both Disease Steps and the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) for a total of 2,755 assessments. The Disease Steps scale consists of 0 = Normal; 1 = Mild disability, mild symptoms or signs; 2 = Moderate disability, visible abnormality of gait; 3 = Early cane, intermittent use of cane; 4 = Late cane, cane-dependent; 5 = Bilateral support; 6 = Confined to wheelchair; and U = Unclassifiable. Results demonstrate that raters could simply and quickly categorize patients using Disease Steps. Patients were uniformly distributed with Disease Steps, whereas a bimodal distribution occurred with the EDSS. On the EDSS, 40.3% of patients scored between 1.0 and 3.5 and 36.0% scored from 6.0 to 6.5, with only 6.9% of patients scoring between 4.0 and 5.5. For 60 patients seen by two neurologists, concordance between raters was excellent for Disease Steps (kappa = 0.8) but only moderate for the EDSS (kappa = 0.54). As a simple and reproducible measure of different functional steps of MS, Disease Steps can be used as a guide in therapeutic decision-making, following response to therapy, and in assessing disease progression.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M J Hohol, E J Orav, H L Weiner. 1995. Disease steps in multiple sclerosis: a simple approach to evaluate disease progression.. https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.45.2.251

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

On health, ability and activity: comments on some basic notions in the ICF.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to highlight and at the same time criticize the holistic view of health expressed in the "International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF)". Particular attention will be paid to the idea suggested in the ICF that not only the ability to perform a specified action but also its actual performance is included in the person's health. My argument intends to show that this is an untenable position. METHOD: The theoretical platform of this paper is philosophical action theory. My argument makes particular use of the distinctions between ability, opportunity, activity and will. My analysis also uses some insights from the contemporary philosophical discussion of health concepts. CONCLUSIONS: Ability (or capacity) and its opposite disability (or incapacity) are essential ingredients in the implicit philosophy of health of the ICF. However, the ICF also puts an emphasis on the actual performance of actions. This is entailed by the performance qualifier that is included in the ICF. I give some arguments for questioning the relevance of this qualifier if it is intended to have a place in the concept of health or have a general function for decisions in health care or rehabilitation. Instead I suggest the introduction of an opportunity qualifier, which could fulfill some of the purposes intended for the performance qualifier.

Persons with Disabilities↗