3.8 Article

Modalities of fatigue in multiple sclerosis:: correlation with clinical and biological factors

期刊

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS
卷 6, 期 2, 页码 124-130

出版社

STOCKTON PRESS
DOI: 10.1191/135245800678827572

关键词

fatigue; multiple sclerosis; pathogenesis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although different factors ore probably involved in the etiology of fatigue in multiple sclerosis patients, no definite mechanism has been proposed We have proposed that fatigue is a complex symptom that includes three clinical different entities (asthenia, fatigability and worsening of symptoms with effort). The goal of this study is to demonstrate if there is a peculiar mechanism for each of the different varieties of fatigue. A control sample of 155 patients (105 women, 50 men) with clinically definite MS was studied. Fatigue was measured using the Fatigue Descriptive Scale (FDS) and the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS). Treatment, depression, anxiety sleep and cellular immune status were studied too. Fatigue was a symptom in 118 patients (76.13%); 26 patients (22.03%) described it as asthenia (fatigue at rest); 85 patients (72.03%) as fatigability (fatigue with exercise), and seven patients (5.9%) as worsening of symptoms. The severity of pyramidal involvement was significantly more severe in patients suffering from fatigue; some immunological Parameters were associated with fatigue as well. The discriminant analysis of the data shows that some of the immunoactivation parameters ore associated with asthenia (F=21.5, P < 0.001), and pyramidal trace involvement is associated with fatigability (F=10.5, P < 0.001). Sleep disorders, anxiety and depression were linked with fatigue in a few patients. No relationship with treatment was proven. In conclusion, fatigue in MS seems to be a heterogeneous entity. Asthenia and fatigability may be different clinical entities. Certain immunoactivation parameters correlate with the presence of asthenia while pyramidal involvement is associated with fatigability.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据