Changing outcome in inflammatory neuropathies Rasch-comparative responsiveness

Objectives: We performed responsiveness comparison between the patient-reported Inflammatory Rasch-built Overall Disability Scale (I-RODS) and the widely used clinician-reported Inflammatory Neuropathy Cause and Treatment-Overall Neuropathy Limitation Scale (INCAT-ONLS) in patients with Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS), chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP), and immunoglobulin M-monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance related polyneuropathy (IgM-MGUSP). Methods: One hundred thirty-seven patients (GBS: 55, CIDP: 59, IgM-MGUSP: 23) with a new diagnosis or clinical relapse assessed both scales. Patients with GBS/CIDP were examined at 0, 1, 3, 6, and 12 months; patients with IgM-MGUSP at 0, 3, and 12. We subjected all data to Rasch analyses, and calculated for each patient the magnitude of change on both scales using the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) related to the individual standard errors (SEs). A responder was defined as having anMCID-SE >= 1.96. Individual scores on both measures were correlated with the EuroQoL thermometer (heuristic responsiveness). Results: The I-RODS showed a significantly higher proportion of meaningful improvement compared with the INCAT-ONLS findings in GBS/CIDP. For IgM-MGUSP, the lack of responsiveness during the 1-year study did not allow a clear separation. Heuristic responsiveness was consistently higher with the I-RODS. Conclusion: The I-RODS more often captures clinically meaningful changes over time, with a greater magnitude of change, compared with the INCAT-ONLS disability scale in patients with GBS and CIDP. The I-RODS offers promise for being a more sensitive measure and its use is therefore suggested in future trials involving patients with GBS and CIDP

Impairment measures versus inflammatory RODS in GBS and CIDP: a responsiveness comparison

This study aimed to define responder' through the concept of minimum clinically important differences using the individually obtained standard errors (MCID-SE) and a heuristic external criterion' responsiveness method in patients with Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS) and chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP). One hundred and fourteen newly diagnosed or relapsing patients (GBS: 55, CIDP: 59) were serially examined (1-year follow-up). The inflammatory Rasch-built overall disability scale (I-RODS), Rasch-transformed MRC sum score (RT-MRC), and Rasch-transformed modified-INCAT-sensory scale (RT-mISS) were assessed. Being-a-responder was defined as having a MCID-SE cut-off 1.96. Also, the correlations between patients' scores on each scale and the EuroQoL health-status thermometer' (external criterion) were determined (higher correlation indicated better responsiveness). In both diseases, the SEs showed a characteristic U'-shaped dynamic pattern across each scales' continuum. The number of patients showing a meaningful change were higher for the I-RODS>RT-MRC>RT-mISS and were in GBS higher than CIDP patients. The MCID-SE concept using Rasch-transformed data demonstrated an individual pattern of being-a-responder' in patients with immune-mediated neuropathies, and the findings were validated by the external criterion responsiveness method. The I-RODS showed greater responsiveness compared with the MRC and INCAT-sensory scales, and its use is therefore recommended in future trials in GBS and CIDP

Comparing the NIS vs. MRC and INCAT sensory scale through Rasch analyses

We performed a comparison between Neuropathy Impairment Scale-sensory (NISs) vs. the modified Inflammatory Neuropathy Cause and Treatment sensory scale (mISS), and NIS-motor vs. the Medical Research Council sum score in patients with Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS), chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP), and IgM monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance-related polyneuropathy (MGUSP). The ordinal data were subjected to Rasch analyses, creating Rasch-transformed (RT)-intervals for all measures. Comparison between measures was based on validity/reliability with an emphasis on responsiveness (using the patient's level of change related to the individually obtained varying SE for minimum clinically important difference). Eighty stable patients (GBS: 30, CIDP: 30, and MGUSP: 20) were assessed twice (entry: two observers; 2-4weeks later: one observer), and 137 newly diagnosed or relapsing patients (GBS: 55, CIDP: 59, and IgM-MGUSP: 23) were serially examined with 12months follow-up. Data modifications were needed to improve model fit for all measures. The sensory and motor scales demonstrated approximately equal and acceptable validity and reliability scores. Responsiveness scores were poor but slightly higher in RT-mISS compared to RT-NISs. Responsiveness was equal for the RT-motor scales, but higher in GBS compared to CIDP; responsiveness was poor in patients with MGUSP, suggesting a longer duration of follow-up in the latter group of patients

Grip strength comparison in immune-mediated neuropathies: Vigorimeter vs. Jamar

The Jamar dynamometer and Vigorimeter have been used to assess grip strength in immune-mediated neuropathies, but have never been compared to each other. Therefore, we performed a comparison study between these two devices in patients with immune-mediated neuropathies. Grip strength data were collected in 102 cross-sectional stable and 163 longitudinal (new diagnoses or changing condition) patients with Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS), chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP), gammopathy-related polyneuropathy (MGUSP), and multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN). Stable patients were assessed twice (validity/reliability studies). Longitudinal patients were assessed 3-5times during 1year. Responsiveness comparison between the two tools was examined using combined anchor-/distribution-based minimum clinically important difference (MCID) techniques. Patients were asked to indicate their preference for the Jamar or Vigorimeter. Both tools correlated highly with each other (=0.86, p<0.0001) and showed good intra-class correlation coefficients (Jamar [Right/Left hands]: ICC 0.997/0.96; Vigori: ICC 0.95/0.98). Meaningful changes were comparable between the two instruments, being higher in GBS compared to CIDP patients. In MGUSP/MMN poor responsiveness was seen. Significant more patients preferred the Vigorimeter. In conclusion, validity, reliability, and responsiveness aspects were comparable between the Jamar dynamometer and Vigorimeter. However, based on patients' preference, the Vigorimeter is recommended in future studies in immune-mediated neuropathies