4.3 Article

Health-related quality of life in patients with longstanding 'benign multiple sclerosis'

Journal

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS AND RELATED DISORDERS
Volume 4, Issue 1, Pages 31-38

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.msard.2014.09.211

Keywords

Multiple sclerosis; Benign; Quality of life; Depression; Fatigue

Funding

  1. Consortium of Multiple Sclerosis Centers (CMSC)
  2. CMSC Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: We explored health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and psychosocial aspects in a cohort of patients with a history of longstanding benign MS (BMS). Methods: Patients with BMS (EDSS <= 3 after 20 years disease duration) were re-assessed 25-30 years post-MS symptom onset for: EDSS, HRQoL (MSQoL-54), depression (Beck Depression Inventory-II), and fatigue (Modified Fatigue Impact Scale). Associations between these measures and patient characteristics (age, disease duration, 'benign status' [remained benign (EDSS <= 3) vs no longer benign (EDSS > 3)]) were examined. Results: Of the 61 patients included, 36 (49%) remained benign and 25 (41%) progressed (EDSS >3). Overall, physical and mental HRQoL scores were positively associated with each other (r=0.63; p<0.0001) and both negatively correlated with fatigue (r= -0.76 and -0.44, respectively; p<0.0005) and depression (r= -0.55 and -0.77; p<0.0001). Patients who remained benign reported better physical HRQoL vs those no longer benign (mean (SD)=67.3 +/- 181 vs 50.7 +/- 19.9, p=0.001), but not mental health (mean (SD)=67.4 +/- 19.3 vs 65.0 +/- 20.6, p=0.639). Generally, neither age nor disease duration was strongly associated with HRQoL (r<0.35). Conclusion: Lower self-reported physical or mental HRQoL was associated with worsening fatigue and depression. However, EDSS progression was associated with the physical, but not mental aspects of HRQoL. Patient-reported HRQoL in 'benign MS' provides insight on the impact of MS beyond EDSS alone. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available