ORIGINAL ARTICLE   Free access

European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 2021 August;57(4):520-6

DOI: 10.23736/S1973-9087.20.06446-1

Copyright © 2020 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

MAM-36 and ABILHAND as outcome measures of multiple sclerosis hand disability: an observational study

Valeria PRADA ¹ ✉, Andrea TACCHINO ², Jessica PODDA ², Ludovico PEDULLÀ ³, Giovanna KONRAD ³, Mario A. BATTAGLIA ⁴, Giampaolo BRICHETTO ^{2, 3}, Margherita MONTI BRAGADIN ^{2, 3}

¹ Department of Neurosciences, Rehabilitation, Ophthalmology, Genetic and Maternal and Infantile Sciences (DINOGMI), University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy; ² Italian Multiple Sclerosis Society Research Foundation (FISM), Genoa, Italy; ³ Italian Multiple Sclerosis Society, AISM Rehabilitation Center, Genoa, Italy; ⁴ Department of Physiopathology, Experimental Medicine and Public Health, University of Siena, Siena, Italy

BACKGROUND: Impaired upper limb functionality and dexterity are common in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) and lead to increased dependency and reduced quality of life.
AIM: The aim of this study was to compare the ability of the Manual Abilites Measure 36 (MAM-36) and the ABILHAND questionnaire to recognize an involvement of the upper limbs in PwMS, and to compare their results with those of other patient reported outcomes (PRO) evaluating disability, functional independence, symptoms of anxiety and depression, fatigue and quality of life.
DESIGN: The study design was observational.
SETTING: The setting of the study was outpatient.
POPULATION: The study population included fifty-one PwMS (mean age of 56.31 years, age range of 33-82 years, 72.5% of patients were females).
METHODS: For each patient were collected MAM-36, ABILHAND questionnaire, expanded disability status scale (EDSS), Functional Independence measure (FIM), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS) and Life Satisfaction Index (LSI).
RESULTS: A strong correlation between MAM-36 and the ABILHAND questionnaire (Spearman r: 0.79; P<0.0001) were found. We obtained a significant correlation between MAM-36 and EDSS (Spearman r: -0.5; P=0.0002), FIM (Spearman r: 0.55; P<0.0001); we did not observe a correlation with MFIS (Spearman r: -0.33; P=0.02); moreover we found a similar trend between ABILHAND and EDSS (Spearman r: -0.47; P=0.0005), FIM (Spearman r: 0.61; P<0.0001), MFIS (Spearman r: -0.41; P=0.002).
CONCLUSIONS: In PwMS the assessment of upper limbs is fundamental since it closely related to the level of disability of the person. Both MAM-36 and ABILHAND Questionnaire are equally able to detect upper limb dysfunctions in PwMS.
CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: Both MAM-36 and ABILHAND can be used for upper limbs evaluation, within a multidimensional approach that seems to be the best way to evaluate PwMS.

KEY WORDS: Outcome assessment, health care; Multiple sclerosis; Upper extremity; Neurodegenerative diseases