Martínez-Martín Pablo, Rojo-Abuin Jose Manuel, Rodríguez-Violante Mayela, Serrano-Dueñas Marcos, Garretto Nélida, Martínez-Castrillo Juan Carlos, Arillo Víctor Campos, Fernández William, Chaná-Cuevas Pedro, Arakaki Tomoko, Alvarez Mario, Ibañez Ivonne Pedroso, Rodríguez-Blázquez Carmen, Chaudhuri Kallol Ray, Merello Marcelo
National Center of Epidemiology and CIBERNED, Carlos III Institute of Health, Madrid, Spain.
Department of Statistics, Centre of Human and Social Sciences, Spanish Council for Scientific Research, Madrid, Spain.
NPJ Parkinsons Dis. 2016 May 5;2:16007. doi: 10.1038/npjparkd.2016.7. eCollection 2016.
Global evaluations of Parkinson's disease (PD) severity are available, but their concordance and accuracy have not been previously tested. The present international, cross-sectional study was aimed at determining the agreement level among four global scales for PD (Hoehn and Yahr, HY; Clinical Global Impression of Severity, CGIS; Clinical Impression of Severity Index, CISI-PD; and Patient Global Impression of Severity, PGIS) and identifying which of them better correlates with itemized PD assessments. Assessments included additional scales for evaluation of the movement impairment, disability, affective disorders, and quality of life. Spearman correlation coefficients, weighted and generalized kappa, and Kendall's concordance coefficient were used. Four hundred thirty three PD patients, 66% in HY stages 2 or 3, mean disease duration 8.8 years, were analyzed. Correlation between the global scales ranged from 0.60 (HY with PGIS) to 0.91 (CGIS with CISI-PD). Kendall's coefficient of concordance resulted 0.76 (<0.0001). HY and CISI-PD showed the highest association with age, disease duration, and levodopa-equivalent daily dose, and CISI-PD with measures of PD manifestations, disability, and quality of life. PGIS and CISI-PD correlated similarly with anxiety and depression scores. The lowest agreement in classifying patients as mild, moderate, or severe was observed between PGIS and HY or CISI-PD (58%) and the highest between CGIS and CISI-PD (84.3%). The four PD global severity scales agree moderately to strongly among them; clinician-based ratings estimate PD severity, as established by other measures, better than PGIS; and the CISI-PD showed the highest association with measures of impairment, disability, and quality of life.
目前已有帕金森病(PD)严重程度的全球评估方法,但其一致性和准确性此前尚未得到验证。本项国际横断面研究旨在确定四种PD全球评估量表(霍恩和雅尔分级,HY;临床总体严重程度印象,CGIS;严重程度指数临床印象,CISI-PD;以及患者总体严重程度印象,PGIS)之间的一致程度,并确定其中哪一种与PD分项评估的相关性更强。评估还包括用于评估运动障碍、残疾、情感障碍和生活质量的其他量表。使用了斯皮尔曼相关系数、加权和广义kappa系数以及肯德尔和谐系数。对433例PD患者进行了分析,其中66%处于HY 2期或3期,平均病程8.8年。全球评估量表之间的相关性范围为0.60(HY与PGIS)至0.91(CGIS与CISI-PD)。肯德尔和谐系数为0.76(<0.0001)。HY和CISI-PD与年龄、病程和左旋多巴等效日剂量的相关性最高,CISI-PD与PD表现、残疾和生活质量的测量指标相关性最高。PGIS和CISI-PD与焦虑和抑郁评分的相关性相似。在将患者分类为轻度、中度或重度时,PGIS与HY或CISI-PD之间的一致性最低(58%),而CGIS与CISI-PD之间的一致性最高(84.3%)。四种PD全球严重程度量表之间的一致性为中等至高度;基于临床医生的评分在评估PD严重程度方面比PGIS更能反映其他测量方法所确定的情况;并且CISI-PD与损伤、残疾和生活质量的测量指标相关性最高。