Chili Lati1, Lori C Guthrie, Michael M Ward. 1. Intramural Research Program, National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (NIAMS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, Maryland 20892-1468, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Patient global assessment (PGA) is commonly measured using a visual analog scale (VAS). The VAS asks patients to integrate many dimensions of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) activity, yet its scope is poorly defined and its endpoints are vague. We investigated whether a modified Rating Scale that used marker states and more defined endpoints would provide a more valid measure of PGA. METHODS: In our prospective longitudinal study, 164 patients with active RA rated their global arthritis activity using the VAS and Rating Scale before and after treatment. To compare construct validity, we correlated each score with 2 reference measures of RA activity, the 28-joint count Disease Activity Score (DAS28) and the physician global assessment, and examined how each measure was associated with different aspects of RA activity, including pain, functioning, and depressive symptoms, in multivariate regression analyses. We also examined sensitivity to change. RESULTS: Both measures were correlated with the DAS28 (r = 0.39 for VAS; r = 0.35 for Rating Scale) and physician global assessment (r = 0.41 for VAS; r = 0.26 for Rating Scale) at the baseline visit. Pain and depressive symptoms had the strongest association with the VAS, while functional limitations and depressive symptoms had the strongest association with the Rating Scale. Residual analysis showed no differences in heterogeneity of patients' ratings. VAS was more sensitive to change than the Rating Scale (standardized response means of 0.55 and 0.45). CONCLUSION: As measures of PGA, the VAS and Rating Scale had comparable construct validity, but differed in which aspects of arthritis activity influenced scores. VAS was more sensitive to change.
OBJECTIVE:Patient global assessment (PGA) is commonly measured using a visual analog scale (VAS). The VAS asks patients to integrate many dimensions of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) activity, yet its scope is poorly defined and its endpoints are vague. We investigated whether a modified Rating Scale that used marker states and more defined endpoints would provide a more valid measure of PGA. METHODS: In our prospective longitudinal study, 164 patients with active RA rated their global arthritis activity using the VAS and Rating Scale before and after treatment. To compare construct validity, we correlated each score with 2 reference measures of RA activity, the 28-joint count Disease Activity Score (DAS28) and the physician global assessment, and examined how each measure was associated with different aspects of RA activity, including pain, functioning, and depressive symptoms, in multivariate regression analyses. We also examined sensitivity to change. RESULTS: Both measures were correlated with the DAS28 (r = 0.39 for VAS; r = 0.35 for Rating Scale) and physician global assessment (r = 0.41 for VAS; r = 0.26 for Rating Scale) at the baseline visit. Pain and depressive symptoms had the strongest association with the VAS, while functional limitations and depressive symptoms had the strongest association with the Rating Scale. Residual analysis showed no differences in heterogeneity of patients' ratings. VAS was more sensitive to change than the Rating Scale (standardized response means of 0.55 and 0.45). CONCLUSION: As measures of PGA, the VAS and Rating Scale had comparable construct validity, but differed in which aspects of arthritis activity influenced scores. VAS was more sensitive to change.
Authors: F C Arnett; S M Edworthy; D A Bloch; D J McShane; J F Fries; N S Cooper; L A Healey; S R Kaplan; M H Liang; H S Luthra Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 1988-03
Authors: D M van der Heijde; M A van't Hof; P L van Riel; M A van Leeuwen; M H van Rijswijk; L B van de Putte Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 1992-02 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Holger J Schünemann; Lauren Griffith; David Stubbing; Roger Goldstein; Gordon H Guyatt Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2003 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: D T Felson; J J Anderson; M Boers; C Bombardier; M Chernoff; B Fried; D Furst; C Goldsmith; S Kieszak; R Lightfoot Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 1993-06
Authors: Nasim Ahmed Khan; Horace Jack Spencer; Essam Ahmed Abda; Rieke Alten; Christof Pohl; Codrina Ancuta; Massimiliano Cazzato; Pál Géher; Laure Gossec; Dan Henrohn; Merete Lund Hetland; Nevsun Inanc; Johannes Wg Jacobs; Eduardo Kerzberg; Maria Majdan; Omondi Oyoo; Ruben A Peredo-Wende; Zahraa Ibrahim Selim; Fotini Nikolaos Skopouli; Alberto Sulli; Kim Hørslev-Petersen; Peter C Taylor; Tuulikki Sokka Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2012-04-24 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Zoran Kvrgic; Gladys B Asiedu; Cynthia S Crowson; Jennifer L Ridgeway; John M Davis Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2018-09-04 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: Lisanne Renskers; Ron J J C van Uden; Anita M P Huis; Sanne A A Rongen; Steven Teerenstra; Piet L C M van Riel Journal: Clin Rheumatol Date: 2018-09-12 Impact factor: 2.980
Authors: Yvonne C Lee; Jing Cui; Bing Lu; Michelle L Frits; Christine K Iannaccone; Nancy A Shadick; Michael E Weinblatt; Daniel H Solomon Journal: Arthritis Res Ther Date: 2011-06-08 Impact factor: 5.156
Authors: Elena Nikiphorou; Helga Radner; Katerina Chatzidionysiou; Carole Desthieux; Codruta Zabalan; Yvonne van Eijk-Hustings; William G Dixon; Kimme L Hyrich; Johan Askling; Laure Gossec Journal: Arthritis Res Ther Date: 2016-10-28 Impact factor: 5.156