Validation of new diagnostic criteria for fatigue in patients with Parkinson disease
Validation of new diagnostic criteria for fatigue in patients with Parkinson disease
Where did the research take place?
The study site has not been established. Author addresses may differ from where the research occurred.
Naples, IT · Author affiliation
Department of Advanced Medical and Surgical Sciences University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" Naples ItalyLocation evidence
Caserta, IT · Author affiliation
Department of Psychology University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" Caserta ItalyLocation evidence
New York City, US · Author affiliation
Departments of Neurology and Medicine University of Rochester Medical Center Rochester New York USALocation evidence
Genoa, IT · Author affiliation
Department of Educational Sciences University of Genoa Genoa ItalyLocation evidence
Cambridge, GB · Author affiliation
Department of Clinical Neurosciences University of Cambridge Cambridge UKLocation evidence
Milan, IT · Author affiliation
Institute of Molecular Bioimaging and Physiology National Research Council Milan ItalyLocation evidence
A plain-language reading has not been prepared for this paper yet.
Original abstract
AbstractBackground and purposeAlthough disabling fatigue is common in Parkinson disease (PD), available consensus‐based diagnostic criteria have not yet been empirically validated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinimetric properties of the criteria.MethodsA sample of outpatients with PD was evaluated for demographic, clinical, behavioral, and cognitive features. Fatigue was diagnosed according to the new diagnostic criteria and was rated by means of the Parkinson Fatigue Scale (PFS) and Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS). Acceptability, concurrent and discriminant validity, and interrater reliability were evaluated with binary logistic regression analyses and Cohen kappa (κ).ResultsOf 241 included patients, 17 (7.1%) met the diagnostic criteria for PD‐related fatigue. Eight of nine symptoms described in Section A of the diagnostic criteria occurred in >50% of patients with fatigue. Acceptability (missing data = 0.8%) of the criteria was good, as was their concurrent validity with the PFS (odds ratio = 3.65) and FSS (odds ratio = 3.63). The discriminant validity of fatigue criteria with other PD‐related behavioral and cognitive features was good (odds ratio < 1.68). The interrater reliability was excellent (κ = 0.92).ConclusionsThis is the first study to test the clinimetric properties of case definition diagnostic criteria for PD‐related fatigue. Our results suggest that current diagnostic criteria may be useful in both clinical practice and research. Future longitudinal studies should examine their long‐term stability.