Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
The 26-item Parkinson disease dyskinesia scale (PDYS-26) was developed to assess the impact of Parkinson’s disease levodopa-induced dyskinesias (PD-LID). The purpose of this qualitative research study was to assess the content validity of the PDYS-26 in an independent sample and to use the findings to suggest a conceptual framework around the impact of PD-LID.
PD patients experiencing LID and their caregivers were recruited from four US clinical sites. Stage I involved 22 qualitative concept elicitation interviews with patients and caregivers, and 11 qualitative cognitive interviews (CI) with patients about the PDYS-26. The PDYS-26 was modified based on Stage I findings. Stage II consisted of 13 CI on the Modified PDYS.
Forty-six participants were interviewed across both stages of the study. Patient mean age was 67.3 (SD ± 9.55) years; 19 (54.3 %) female; 34 (97.1 %) white. The content validity of the PDYS-26 was generally supported. A revised conceptual framework with three hypothesized domains (body control, activities of daily living, social consequences) was developed. Modifications were made to the PDYS-26 (i.e., emphasizing LID in the instructions; response scale modification; deleting or modifying items), which resulted in the 22-item Modified PDYS.
Stage I and II findings suggested a number of modifications to the scale in order to improve the content validity. Psychometric testing of the revised scale with a larger patient sample is suggested to evaluate item performance, establish scoring, and provide quantitative support for the conceptual framework.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Ostergaard, K., Sunde, N., & Dupont, E. (2002). Effects of bilateral stimulation of the subthalamic nucleus in patients with severe Parkinson’s disease and motor fluctuations. [Clinical Trial Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t]. Movement Disorders, 17(4), 693–700. doi: 10.1002/mds.10188. PubMedCrossRef
Nutt, J. G., Chung, K. A., & Holford, N. H. (2010). Dyskinesia and the antiparkinsonian response always temporally coincide: A retrospective study. [Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t Research Support, U.S. Gov’t, Non-P.H.S.]. Neurology, 74(15), 1191–1197. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e3181d90050. PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
Goetz, C. G., Stebbins, G. T., Shale, H. M., Lang, A. E., Chernik, D. A., Chmura, T. A., et al. (1994). Utility of an objective dyskinesia rating scale for Parkinson’s disease: Inter- and intra-rater reliability assessment. [Clinical Trial Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t]. Movement Disorders, 9(4), 390–394. doi: 10.1002/mds.870090403. PubMedCrossRef
Guy, W. (1976). ECDEU assessment manual for psychopharmacology (revised ed.). Washington, DC: US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
Katzenschlager, R., Schrag, A., Evans, A., Manson, A., Carroll, C. B., Ottaviani, D., et al. (2007). Quantifying the impact of dyskinesias in PD: The PDYS-26: A patient-based outcome measure. [Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t Validation Studies]. Neurology, 69(6), 555–563. doi: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000266669.18308.af. PubMedCrossRef
Martinez-Martin, P., Gil-Nagel, A., Gracia, L. M., Gomez, J. B., Martinez-Sarries, J., & Bermejo, F. (1994). Unified Parkinson’s disease rating scale characteristics and structure. The cooperative multicentric group. [Multicenter Study]. Movement Disorders, 9(1), 76–83. doi: 10.1002/mds.870090112. PubMedCrossRef
Parkinson’s Study Group (2001). Evidence of dykinesias in pilot, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of remacemide in advanced parkinsons disease. Archives of Neurology, 58, 1660–1668.
Goetz, C. G., Stebbins, G. T., Chung, K. A., Hauser, R. A., Miyasaki, J. M., Nicholas, A. P., et al. (2013). Which dyskinesia scale best detects treatment response? [Randomized Controlled Trial Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t]. Movement Disorders, 28(3), 341–346. doi: 10.1002/mds.25321. PubMedCrossRef
Patrick, D. L., Burke, L. B., Gwaltney, C. J., Leidy, N. K., Martin, M. L., Molsen, E., et al. (2011). Content validity—Establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO good research practices task force report: Part 2—Assessing respondent understanding. Value in Health, 14(8), 978–988. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.06.013. PubMedCrossRef
Patrick, D. L., Burke, L. B., Gwaltney, C. J., Leidy, N. K., Martin, M. L., Molsen, E., et al. (2011). Content validity—Establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO good research practices task force report: part 1–Eliciting concepts for a new PRO instrument. Value in Health, 14(8), 967–977. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.06.014. PubMedCrossRef
Willis, G. B. (2005). Cognitive interviewing: A tool for improving questionnaire design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
- Assessment of Parkinson’s disease levodopa-induced dyskinesia: a qualitative research study
William R. Lenderking
- Springer International Publishing