Skip Navigation


Rheumatology Advance Access originally published online on December 13, 2006
Rheumatology 2007 46(4):703-708; doi:10.1093/rheumatology/kel394
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
46/4/703    most recent
kel394v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Goodacre, L.
Right arrow Articles by Goodacre, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Goodacre, L.
Right arrow Articles by Goodacre, J.
Related Collections
Right arrow Rheumatoid Arthritis
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Development and validation of a patient-centred Measure of Activity Limitation (MAL) in rheumatoid arthritis

L. Goodacre, J. Smith, D. Meddis1 and J. Goodacre

Interdisciplinary Research and Teaching Group for Chronic Disease and Rehabilitation, University of Central Lancashire, Preston and 1Health Economics and Outcomes Research, AstraZeneca, Macclesfield, UK.

Correspondence to: Dr Lynne Goodacre, PhD, Lancashire School of Health and Postgraduate Medicine, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, PR1 2HE UK. E-mail: lgoodacre{at}uclan.ac.uk


  Abstract

Objective. This study sought to understand patients’ experiences of activity limitation in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to inform the development and preliminary validation of a new patient-centred assessment tool.

Methods. Interviews, focus groups and diaries provided insight into patients’ experiences of change in activity limitation. These data informed item generation for the Measure of Activity Limitation (MAL) questionnaire. Postal surveys, comprising the MAL, Short Form 36 (SF36) and Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), were used to inform item reduction and assess the MAL's validity, reliability and sensitivity.

Results. Qualitative exploration of activity limitation with 30 patients led to the development of a 36-item questionnaire addressing the impact of symptoms on activity, difficulty in global function and difficulty in task performance. Analysis of data from a postal survey of 168 patients led to the development of a 19-item questionnaire which demonstrated moderate correlations with the HAQ and relevant scales of the SF36. A second postal questionnaire, completed on two occasions by 308 patients, assessed test–retest reliability. One hundred and ninety-three people reporting no change in disease showed mean change in MAL score between the two completions of 0.41 [95% confidence interval (CI) –0.38 –1.22)], demonstrating test–retest reliability. Thirty-two patients reporting improvement showed a mean change of –7.84 (95% CI –11.15 to –4.54) and 83 reporting deterioration showed mean change of 4.63 (95% CI 3.09–6.16), suggesting that the MAL is sensitive to self-reported clinical change.

Conclusion. Our results suggest that the MAL is valid, reliable and sensitive to self-reported change. The MAL may provide a useful patient-centred adjunct to existing measures of activity limitation.

KEY WORDS: Activity limitation, Rheumatoid arthritis, Outcome measurement

Submitted 15 May 2006; revised version accepted 25 October 2006.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.