TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparing the MSIS-29 and the Health Utilities Index Mark III in Multiple Sclerosis
AU - Marrie, Ruth Ann
AU - Dolovich, Casandra
AU - Cutter, Gary R.
AU - Fox, Robert J.
AU - Salter, Amber
N1 - Funding Information:
NARCOMS is a project of the Consortium of Multiple Sclerosis Centers (CMSC). NARCOMS is funded in part by the CMSC and the Foundation of the CMSC. The study was also supported in part by the Waugh Family Chair in Multiple Sclerosis and Research Manitoba Chair (to RM). The funding source(s) had no role in the study design, collection, analysis or interpretation of the data, nor in the decision to submit the article for publication.
Funding Information:
Conflict of Interest: RM receives research funding from: CIHR, Research Manitoba, Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada, Multiple Sclerosis Scientific Foundation, Crohn’s and Colitis Canada, National Multiple Sclerosis Society, CMSC and the US Department of Defense, and is a co-investigator on studies receiving funding from Biogen Idec and Roche Canada. GC data/safety monitoring committees for AMO, BioLineRx, BrainStorm Cell Therapeutics, Galmed, Horizon, Hisun, Merck, Merck/Pfizer, OPKO Biologics, Neurim, Novartis, Orphazyme, Sanofi, Reata, Receptos/Celgene, Teva, NHLBI (Protocol Review Committee), NICHD (OPRU oversight committee); consulting/advisory boards for Biogen, Click Therapeutics, Genzyme, Genentech, GW, Klein Buendel, MedImmune, MedDay, Novartis, Osmotica, Perception Neuroscience, Recursion, Roche, Somahlution, and TG Therapeutics. RF has received personal consulting fees from AB Science, Biogen, Celgene, EMD Serono, Genentech, Genzyme, Immunic, Janssen, Novartis, Sanofi, and TG Therapeutics; has served on advisory committees for AB Science, Biogen, Genzyme, Immunic, Janssen, Novartis, Sanofi, and TG Therapeutics; and received clinical trial contract and research grant funding from Biogen, Novartis, and Sanofi. AS is a journal editor/member of editorial advisory board for Circulation: Cardiovascular Imaging.
Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2021 Marrie, Dolovich, Cutter, Fox and Salter.
PY - 2021/12/17
Y1 - 2021/12/17
N2 - Objective: Since the properties of health-related quality of life measures vary across samples, studies directly comparing the properties of different measures can be useful in understanding their relative strengths and limitations. We aimed to compare the psychometric properties of the Health Utilities Index Mark III (HUI3) and the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29 (MSIS-29). Methods: In Spring 2020, North American Research Committee on Multiple Sclerosis (NARCOMS) Registry participants completed the HUI3, MSIS-29, Patient Determined Disease Steps (PDDS) and SymptoMScreen. For the HUI3 and MSIS-29 we assessed floor and ceiling effects, construct validity, and internal consistency reliability. We used relative efficiency to compare the discriminating ability of the two measures with respect to disability. Results: We included 5,664 participants in the analysis, with mean (SD) age 63 (10.1) years; 4,579 (80.8%) were women. For the HUI3 the mean (SD) score was 0.44 (0.32), for the MSIS-29 physical it was 34.0 (24.2) and for the MSIS-29 psychological it was 25.9 (20.4). Neither of the measures had floor or ceiling effects, and internal consistency reliability was > 0.70 for both. The HUI3 and MSIS-29 physical were strongly correlated (r = −0.78; 95%CI:−0.79,−0.77). The correlation between the HUI3 and MSIS-29 psychological was weaker but remained moderately strong (r = −0.64; 95%CI:−0.66,−0.63). After adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical factors, relative efficiency to discriminate between disability (PDDS) groups was highest for the MSIS-29 physical scale, followed by the HUI3. Conclusion: Both measures had adequate validity and reliability. The MSIS-29 physical discriminated between disability groups better than the HUI3.
AB - Objective: Since the properties of health-related quality of life measures vary across samples, studies directly comparing the properties of different measures can be useful in understanding their relative strengths and limitations. We aimed to compare the psychometric properties of the Health Utilities Index Mark III (HUI3) and the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale-29 (MSIS-29). Methods: In Spring 2020, North American Research Committee on Multiple Sclerosis (NARCOMS) Registry participants completed the HUI3, MSIS-29, Patient Determined Disease Steps (PDDS) and SymptoMScreen. For the HUI3 and MSIS-29 we assessed floor and ceiling effects, construct validity, and internal consistency reliability. We used relative efficiency to compare the discriminating ability of the two measures with respect to disability. Results: We included 5,664 participants in the analysis, with mean (SD) age 63 (10.1) years; 4,579 (80.8%) were women. For the HUI3 the mean (SD) score was 0.44 (0.32), for the MSIS-29 physical it was 34.0 (24.2) and for the MSIS-29 psychological it was 25.9 (20.4). Neither of the measures had floor or ceiling effects, and internal consistency reliability was > 0.70 for both. The HUI3 and MSIS-29 physical were strongly correlated (r = −0.78; 95%CI:−0.79,−0.77). The correlation between the HUI3 and MSIS-29 psychological was weaker but remained moderately strong (r = −0.64; 95%CI:−0.66,−0.63). After adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical factors, relative efficiency to discriminate between disability (PDDS) groups was highest for the MSIS-29 physical scale, followed by the HUI3. Conclusion: Both measures had adequate validity and reliability. The MSIS-29 physical discriminated between disability groups better than the HUI3.
KW - Multiple Sclerosis
KW - discriminating ability
KW - quality of life
KW - reliability
KW - validity
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85122076722&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85122076722&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3389/fneur.2021.747853
DO - 10.3389/fneur.2021.747853
M3 - Article
C2 - 34975716
AN - SCOPUS:85122076722
SN - 1664-2295
VL - 12
JO - Frontiers in Neurology
JF - Frontiers in Neurology
M1 - 747853
ER -