Primary lateral sclerosis (PLS) functional rating scale: PLS-specific clinimetric scale.

INTRODUCTION: Our research aim was to develop a novel clinimetric scale sensitive enough to detect disease progression in primary lateral sclerosis (PLS). METHODS: A prototype of the PLS Functional Rating Scale (PLSFRS) was generated. Seventy-seven participants with PLS were enrolled and evaluated at 21 sites that comprised the PLSFRS study group. Participants were assessed using the PLSFRS, Neuro-Quality of Life (QoL), Schwab-England Activities of Daily Living (ADL), and the Clinical Global Impression of Change scales. Participants completed telephone assessments at 12, 24, and 48 weeks after enrollment. RESULTS: The PLSFRS demonstrated internal consistency as well as intrarater, interrater, telephone test-retest reliability, and construct validity. Significant changes in disease progression were detected at 6 and 12 months; changes measured by the PLSFRS vs the ALSFRS-R were significantly higher. DISCUSSION: The PLSFRS is a valid tool to assess the natural history of PLS in a shorter study period.

Healthcare resource utilization at different stages of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: Results from a real-world survey.

People with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (pALS) require complex, multi-disciplinary care, resulting in extensive healthcare resource utilization (HCRU). To investigate the relationship between HCRU and ALS progression, the study objectives were (i) to characterize HCRU in pALS and (ii) to establish whether this varied according to disease stage, as defined using three different methodologies: neurologist-defined early/mid/late stage, the King's clinical staging system for ALS, and the Milan Torino Staging system for ALS (MiToS). Real-world data were drawn from the Adelphi ALS Disease-Specific Programme™, a point-in-time survey of neurologists in France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the UK, and the USA conducted July 2020-March 2021. The analysis included survey responses from 142 physicians with respect to 880 pALS. With advancing ALS stage, significant differences were observed in the number of healthcare professional consultations and X-rays per person (both p < 0.05 for all staging systems), and the proportion of pALS with emergency room admissions, intensive care unit admissions, and assisted ventilation (all p < 0.05 for all staging systems). Across stages, >55% of pALS received care from a general neurologist and a general/primary care practitioner. With increasing stage, there was a significant difference in the proportion receiving care from a physical therapist, pulmonologist/respiratory care practitioner, respiratory therapist, speech/language therapist, and palliative care team, and in the proportion receiving care only from professional caregivers (all p < 0.05 for all staging systems). This study confirmed the substantial HCRU required to support pALS through all stages of ALS and highlighted an increasing need for healthcare resources as the disease progresses.

Validation of the Italian version of the Rasch-Built Overall Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Disability Scale (ROADS) administered to patients and their caregivers.

Introduction: The Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) functional rating scale - revised (ALSFRS-R) is the most widely used tool for the clinical monitoring in ALS patients. Despite his usefulness as a multidimensional scale, the combined score derived from different domains is not linearly related to symptoms severity. The Rasch-Built Overall ALS Disability Scale (ROADS) has recently been developed to overcome some of these limitations. Objectives: To validate the Italian version of the ROADS scale and assess the reliability of its administration to patients versus their respective caregivers and the correlation to the corresponding ALSFRS-R. Methods: In the Turin ALS Center, the ROADS Scale questionnaire was administered together with ALSFRS-R to 55 ALS patients and their caregivers during regular follow-up assessments. Correlation analysis was performed using Spearman's rho, Bland-Altman difference plots, Cronbach's alpha coefficient and Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), one-way random effects were used for proper comparison. Results: Their correlation coefficient between patients and caregivers ROADS was found to be very high (ICC 0.95, p < 0.001). Stratifying for age, sex, site of onset, type of caregiver, disease duration, and progression rate, ICC values that did not change significantly among the considered categories. We also found a high correlation between ROADS and ALSFRS-R total score (patients' correlation coefficient: 0.88). Conclusions: The Italian version of the ROADS scale is a valid and reliable tool to monitor disease burden, showing a high level of agreement between the responses given by patients and caregivers.