Validation of the Parkinson Fatigue Scale in Chinese Parkinson's disease patients

Abstract

ObjectiveFatigue is a common nonmotor symptom in Parkinson's disease (PD); however, the Parkinson's disease fatigue scale (PFS), which is designed to measure fatigue in PD, has not been validated in China. The aim of this study was to determine the validity and reliability of the Chinese version of the PFS in PD patients.MethodsA total of 115 PD patients were evaluated at baseline and after 7 days. Assessments included the PFS, the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), and scales assessing motor, cognition, depression, and anxiety. Acceptability was assessed in terms of the rate of missing data and floor and ceiling effects. Cronbach's alpha was calculated to determine internal consistency. Test–retest reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Spearman's rank correlation coefficients were used to calculate convergent and divergent validity between PFS scores and scales assessing clinical characteristics.ResultsNo data were missing for the PFS. Compared with the original scoring method, the binary scoring method had relatively large floor effects (5.21% vs. 17.39%) and ceiling effects (0.90% vs. 4.31%). The internal consistency and test–retest reliability of the PFS were satisfactory (original scoring method: Cronbach's alpha = 0.97, ICC = 0.94; binary scoring method: Cronbach's alpha = 0.94, ICC = 0.94). The PFS score exhibited strong convergent validity with FSS score (correlation coefficient = 0.87). PFS score was weakly to moderately correlated with disease duration and with measures of disease stage, motor function, depression, and anxiety (range of correlation coefficients: 0.25–0.48). There was no significant correlation between PFS score and either onset age or MoCA score (range of correlation coefficients: −0.05 to 0.12).ConclusionThe Chinese version of the PFS is a valid measure for assessing fatigue in PD.

Turkish version of Parkinson Fatigue Scale: Validity and reliability study of binary scoring method

“…The floor effect of the mean score of the PFS remained slightly higher (15.2% in test and 15.9% in retest) with a acceptable limit of 15% and, the ceiling effect was within acceptable limits. Compared to the Chinese version (floor and ceiling effects were 17.39% and 4.31%, respectively), [31] the results from both versions were similar. When the original scoring system was used, no floor and ceiling effects were found in the Brazilian [33] and Swedish [34] versions.…”

“…The psychometric properties of PFS have been evaluated in five previous studies. To investigate the psychometric properties of the PFS, the original scoring method and the binary scoring method of the scale in the original British English [8] and Chinese versions, [31] and the original scoring method of the scale in the American English, [32] Brazilian [33] and Swedish [34] versions were used. In the present study, we used the binary scoring method of the PFS.…”

“…Also, in the Chinese version, the floor and ceiling effect was low (5.21 and 0.90). [31] This difference is possibly due to the dichotomous format of their response choices.…”

“…The ICC value for the overall score was between the original English version (0.83) [8] and the Chinese version (0.94). [31] This difference was probably due to the test-retest intervals. While the time interval was approximately two weeks in the first study, it was seven days in the other.…”

Inherited Ataxia and Intrathecal Baclofen for the Treatment of Spasticity and Painful Spasms

“…A longer disease duration and wheelchair status have been correlated to severe fatigue [32]. FSS was used in other chronic neurologic disorders such as MS and Parkinson’s disease and showed good psychometric properties [18, 33]. …”