The AMC Linear Disability Score in patients with newly diagnosed Parkinson disease.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the clinimetric properties of the AMC Linear Disability Score (ALDS), a new generic disability measure based on Item Response Theory, in patients with newly diagnosed Parkinson disease (PD). METHODS: A sample of 132 patients with PD was evaluated using the Hoehn and Yahr (H&Y), the Unified PD Rating Scale motor examination, the Schwab and England scale (S&E), the Short Form-36, the PD Quality of Life Questionnaire, and the ALDS. RESULTS: The internal consistency reliability of the ALDS was good (alpha = 0.95) with 55 items extending the sufficient item-total correlation criterion (r > 0.20). The ALDS was correlated with other disability measures (r = 0.50 to 0.63) and decreasingly associated with measures reflecting impairments (r = 0.36 to 0.37) and mental health (r = 0.23 to -0.01). With regard to know-group validity, the ALDS indicated that patients with more severe PD (H&Y stage 3) were more disabled than patients with mild (H&Y stage 1) or moderate PD (H&Y stage 2) (p < 0.0001). The ALDS discriminated between more or less severe extrapyramidal symptoms (p = 0.001) and patients with postural instability showed lower ALDS scores compared to patients without postural instability (p = or< 0.0001). Compared to the S&E (score 100% = 19%), the ALDS showed less of a ceiling effect (5%). CONCLUSION: The AMC Linear Disability Score is a flexible, feasible, and clinimetrically promising instrument to assess the level of disability in patients with newly diagnosed Parkinson disease.

Development of the Qualeffo-31, an osteoporosis-specific quality-of-life questionnaire.

INTRODUCTION: Vertebral deformities are a common consequence of osteoporosis and are known to decrease quality of life. The Qualeffo-41 is a quality-of-life questionnaire especially developed for measuring quality of life in patients with vertebral deformities. It consists of 41 questions arranged in five domains: pain, physical function, social function, general health perception, and mental function. The objectives of this study were: (1) to develop a shorter version of the Qualeffo-41 by removing redundant questions; and (2) to investigate the scale characteristics, reliability, and validity of this shorter version. METHODS: The study was performed using data from the Qualeffo validation study and the Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation (MORE) study. The analyses were performed in patients with vertebral deformities (n=579). Factor analysis on polychoric correlations and an item response theory (IRT) model, i.e., the generalized partial credit model (GPCM), were used to create a shorter version of Qualeffo-41. Using GPCM, scoring weights were computed for all items. RESULTS: Three items were removed from the data set because of too many missing values. Factor analysis identified three instead of five domains: (1) pain, (2) physical function, and (3) mental function. Five items had factor loadings <0.4 and were not included in the GPCM. After excluding several items, the domains pain (four items), physical function (18 items), and mental function (nine items) showed a good, reasonable, and excellent fit, respectively. This indicates that the mental function domain and the pain domain are more unidimensional than the physical function domain. All three domains showed a very high correlation (r > or =0.95) with the corresponding domains of the Qualeffo-41. CONCLUSIONS: Qualeffo-31 was developed, consisting of three domains with a reasonable to excellent fit to the GPCM. Although the fit to the GPCM supports the construct validity of the Qualeffo-31, validation in a new study should be performed before using it in practice.