Advertisement

A comparison of 4 questionnaires to measure fatigue in postpoliomyelitis syndrome 1

      Abstract

      Horemans HL, Nollet F, Beelen A, Lankhorst GJ. A comparison of 4 questionnaires to measure fatigue in postpoliomyelitis syndrome. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004;85:392–8.

      Objective

      To assess the comparability and reproducibility of 4 questionnaires used to measure fatigue in postpoliomyelitis syndrome (PPS).

      Design

      Repeated-measures at a 3-week interval.

      Setting

      University hospital.

      Participants

      Convenience sample of 65 patients with PPS.

      Interventions

      Not applicable.

      Main outcome measures

      The Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), the Nottingham Health Profile (NHP) energy category, the Polio Problem List (PPL) fatigue item, and the Dutch Short Fatigue Questionnaire (SFQ).

      Results

      Correlations of scores between questionnaires were all significant (P<.01) and ranged from .43 (between the NHP energy category and the PPL fatigue item) to .68 (between the PPL fatigue item and the SFQ). Scores on the second visit, normalized to a 0 to 100 scale, were: FSS, 78±15; NHP energy category, 47±35; PPL fatigue item, 81±17; and SFQ, 65±22. Except for the difference between the FSS and the PPL fatigue item, the differences in scores between the questionnaires were significant (P<.01). Scale analysis indicated that all questionnaires measured the same unidimensional construct. The reproducibility of the FSS, the PPL fatigue item, and the SFQ was moderate. The smallest detectable change was 1.5 points for the FSS, 2.0 points for the PPL fatigue item, and 1.9 points for the SFQ.

      Conclusions

      Although the questionnaires measure the same fatigue construct in PPS, the results are not interchangeable because the ranges of measurement differ. The NHP energy category, in particular, appeared to have a high detection threshold. The moderate reproducibility of the questionnaires indicates a lack of precision, especially when applied at the individual patient level.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Berlly M.H.
        • Strauser W.W.
        • Hall K.M.
        Fatigue in postpolio syndrome.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1991; 72: 115-118
        • Nollet F.
        • Beelen A.
        • Prins M.H.
        • et al.
        Disability and functional assessment in former polio patients with and without postpolio syndrome.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999; 80: 136-143
        • Agre J.C.
        • Rodriquez A.A.
        • Sperling K.B.
        Symptoms and clinical impressions of patients seen in a postpolio clinic.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1989; 70: 367-370
        • Ramlow J.
        • Alexander M.
        • LaPorte R.
        • Kaufmann C.
        • Kuller L.
        Epidemiology of the post-polio syndrome.
        Am J Epidemiol. 1992; 136: 769-786
        • Halstead L.S.
        • Rossi C.D.
        Post-polio syndrome.
        Birth Defects Orig Artic Ser. 1987; 23: 13-26
        • Packer T.L.
        • Martins I.
        • Krefting L.
        • Brouwer B.
        Activity and post-polio fatigue.
        Orthopedics. 1991; 14: 1223-1226
        • Packer T.L.
        • Sauriol A.
        • Brouwer B.
        Fatigue secondary to chronic illness.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1994; 75: 1122-1126
        • Schanke A.K.
        • Stanghelle J.K.
        Fatigue in polio survivors.
        Spinal Cord. 2001; 39: 243-251
        • Schanke A.K.
        Psychological distress, social support and coping behaviour among polio survivors.
        Disabil Rehabil. 1997; 19: 108-116
        • Trojan D.A.
        • Collet J.
        • Pollak M.N.
        • et al.
        Serum insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) does not correlate positively with isometric strength, fatigue, and quality of life in post-polio syndrome.
        J Neurol Sci. 2001; 182: 107-115
        • Willen C.
        • Grimby G.
        Pain, physical activity, and disability in individuals with late effects of polio.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1998; 79: 915-919
        • Willen C.
        • Sunnerhagen K.S.
        • Grimby G.
        Dynamic water exercise in individuals with late poliomyelitis.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001; 82: 66-72
        • Grimby G.
        • Jonsson A.L.
        Disability in poliomyelitis sequelae.
        Phys Ther. 1994; 74: 415-424
        • Tiesinga L.J.
        • Dassen T.W.
        • Halfens R.J.
        DUFS and DEFS.
        Int J Nurs Stud. 1998; 35: 115-123
        • Trojan D.A.
        • Cashman N.R.
        An open trial of pyridostigmine in post-poliomyelitis syndrome.
        Can J Neurol Sci. 1995; 22: 223-227
        • Trojan D.A.
        • Collet J.P.
        • Shapiro S.
        • et al.
        A multicenter, randomized, double-blinded trial of pyridostigmine in postpolio syndrome.
        Neurology. 1999; 53: 1225-1233
        • Bruno R.L.
        • Zimmerman J.R.
        • Creange S.J.
        • Lewis T.
        • Molzen T.
        • Frick N.M.
        Bromocriptine in the treatment of post-polio fatigue.
        Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1996; 75: 340-347
        • Stein D.P.
        • Dambrosia J.M.
        • Dalakas M.C.
        A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of amantadine for the treatment of fatigue in patients with the post-polio syndrome.
        Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1995; 753: 296-302
        • Windebank A.J.
        • Litchy W.J.
        • Daube J.R.
        • Iverson R.A.
        Lack of progression of neurologic deficit in survivors of paralytic polio.
        Neurology. 1996; 46: 80-84
        • Fitzpatrick R.
        • Ziebland S.
        • Jenkinson C.
        • Mowat A.
        • Mowat A.
        Importance of sensitivity to change as a criterion for selecting health status measures.
        Qual Health Care. 1992; 1: 89-93
        • Halstead L.S.
        Post-polio syndrome.
        in: Munsat T.L. Post-polio syndrome. Butterworth-Heinemann, Stoneham (MA)1991: 23-38
        • Krupp L.B.
        • LaRocca N.G.
        • Muir-Nash J.
        • Steinberg A.D.
        The fatigue severity scale.
        Arch Neurol. 1989; 46: 1121-1123
        • Merkies I.S.
        • Schmitz P.I.
        • Samijn J.P.
        • van der Meche F.G.
        • van Doorn P.A.
        Fatigue in immune-mediated polyneuropathies. European Inflammatory Neuropathy Cause and Treatment (INCAT) Group.
        Neurology. 1999; 53: 1648-1654
        • Kleinman L.
        • Zodet M.W.
        • Hakim Z.
        • et al.
        Psychometric evaluation of the fatigue severity scale for use in chronic hepatitis C.
        Qual Life Res. 2000; 9: 499-508
        • Erdman R.A.
        • Passchier J.
        • Kooijman M.
        • Stronks D.L.
        The Dutch version of the Nottingham Health Profile.
        Psychol Rep. 1993; 72: 1027-1035
        • Visser M.C.
        • Koudstaal P.J.
        • Erdman R.A.
        • et al.
        Measuring quality of life in patients with myocardial infarction or stroke.
        J Epidemiol Community Health. 1995; 49: 513-517
        • Alberts M.
        • Smets E.M.
        • Vercoulen J.H.
        • Garssen B.
        • Bleijenberg G.
        [Abbreviated fatigue questionnaire.
        Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 1997; 141: 1526-1530
        • Bland J.M.
        • Altman D.G.
        Multiple significance tests.
        BMJ. 1995; 310: 170
        • Molenaar I.W.
        • Sijtsma K.
        User’s manual MSP5 for Windows..
        iec ProGAMMA, Groningen (Netherlands)2000
        • Mokken R.J.
        A theory and procedure of scale analysis.
        De Gruyter, New York1971
        • Rankin G.
        • Stokes M.
        Reliability of assessment tools in rehabilitation.
        Clin Rehabil. 1998; 12: 187-199
        • Nunnally J.
        • Bernstein I.
        Psychometric theory.
        3rd ed. McGraw-Hill, New York2000
        • Bland J.M.
        • Altman D.G.
        Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.
        Lancet. 1986; 1: 307-310
        • Beckerman H.
        • Roebroeck M.E.
        • Lankhorst G.J.
        • Becher J.G.
        • Bezemer P.D.
        • Verbeek A.L.
        Smallest real difference, a link between reproducibility and responsiveness.
        Qual Life Res. 2001; 10: 571-578
        • Pratt R.K.
        • Fairbank J.C.
        • Virr A.
        The reliability of the Shuttle Walking Test, the Swiss Spinal Stenosis Questionnaire, the Oxford Spinal Stenosis Score, and the Oswestry Disability Index in the assessment of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.
        Spine. 2002; 27: 84-91
        • Thoren-Jonsson A.L.
        • Hedberg M.
        • Grimby G.
        Distress in everyday life in people with poliomyelitis sequelae.
        J Rehabil Med. 2001; 33: 119-127
        • McKenna S.P.
        • Hunt S.M.
        • McEwen J.
        Weighting the seriousness of perceived health problems using Thurstone’s method of paired comparisons.
        Int J Epidemiol. 1981; 10: 93-97
        • Jenkinson C.
        Why are we weighting? A critical examination of the use of item weights in a health status measure.
        Soc Sci Med. 1991; 32: 1413-1416
        • Prieto L.
        • Alonso J.
        • Viladrich M.C.
        • Anto J.M.
        Scaling the Spanish version of the Nottingham Health Profile.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 1996; 49: 31-38
        • Franks P.J.
        • Moffatt C.J.
        Health related quality of life in patients with venous ulceration.
        Qual Life Res. 2001; 10: 693-700
        • Prieto L.
        • Alonso J.
        • Ferrer M.
        • Anto J.M.
        Are results of the SF-36 health survey and the Nottingham Health Profile similar?.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 1997; 50: 463-473
        • Lamarca R.
        • Alonso J.
        • Santed R.
        • Prieto L.
        Performance of a perceived health measure in different groups of the population.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2001; 54: 127-135
        • Hunt S.M.
        • MacEwen J.
        • MacKenna S.P.
        Measuring health status.
        Croom Helm, London1986
        • Lee J.
        • Koh D.
        • Ong C.N.
        Statistical evaluation of agreement between two methods for measuring a quantitative variable.
        Comput Biol Med. 1989; 19: 61-70
        • Andresen E.M.
        Criteria for assessing the tools of disability outcomes research.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2000; 81: S15-S20
        • Tiesinga L.J.
        • Dassen T.W.
        • Halfens R.J.
        Fatigue.
        Nurs Diagn. 1996; 7: 51-62
        • Jans M.P.
        • Schellevis F.G.
        • van Eijk J.T.
        The Nottingham Health Profilescore distribution, internal consistency and validity in asthma and COPD patients.
        Qual Life Res. 1999; 8: 501-507
        • Essink-Bot M.L.
        • Krabbe P.F.
        • Bonsel G.J.
        • Aaronson N.K.
        An empirical comparison of four generic health status measures. The Nottingham Health Profile, the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short-Form Health Survey, the COOP/WONCA charts, and the EuroQol instrument.
        Med Care. 1997; 35: 522-537
        • Angst F.
        • Aeschlimann A.
        • Stucki G.
        Smallest detectable and minimal clinically important differences of rehabilitation intervention with their implications for required sample sizes using WOMAC and SF-36 quality of life measurement instruments in patients with osteoarthritis of the lower extremities.
        Arthritis Care Res. 2001; 45: 384-391
        • McHorney C.A.
        • Tarlov A.R.
        Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice.
        Qual Life Res. 1995; 4: 293-307