AI Article Synopsis
- Recent advancements in neuromuscular disease treatments could significantly improve patient outcomes, highlighting the importance of effective tools to measure motor function, like the Motor Function Measure (MFM).
- The study aims to evaluate the quality of evidence surrounding MFM's measurement properties, specifically the 20-item version for young children and the original 32-item version, through a systematic review of existing validation and responsiveness research.
- Analysis of 49 studies shows that MFM demonstrates strong reliability and validity across various neuromuscular diseases, with a particular emphasis on Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA), although further research is needed for specific diseases and measurement properties.
Article Abstract
Background: Recent pharmaceutical breakthroughs in neuromuscular diseases may considerably change the prognosis and natural history these diseases. The ability to measure clinically relevant outcomes such as motor function is critical for the assessment of therapeutics and the follow up of individuals. The Motor Function Measure (MFM) is a quantitative scale designed to measure motor function in adult and children with neuromuscular disease (NMD).
Objective: The objective of this study is to assess the quality and level of evidence of the MFM's published measurement properties by completing a systematic review of the validation and responsiveness studies of the MFM20 (a 20-item version of MFM adapted for children 2 to 6 years of age) and the MFM32 (the original 32 item version), in all NMDs and in specific diseases.
Methods: A search for MFM responsiveness and MFM validation studies was completed in February 2023 in EMBASE, MEDLINE, SCOPUS and Web of Science databases. The PRISMA guidelines and the COSMIN manual for systematic reviews were followed for databases searches, articles screening and selection, study quality and measurement properties evaluation.
Results: 49 studies were included in analysis. In studies including individuals with all NMDs, MFM's internal consistency, reliability, convergent validity, construct validity and responsiveness were rated as sufficient with a high quality of evidence. Structural validity was rated sufficient with a moderate quality of evidence In SMA in particular, MFM's reliability, internal consistency, convergent validity, discriminant validity and responsiveness are sufficient with a high quality of evidence. More studies would be required to assess specific measurement properties in different diseases. MFM32's minimal clinically relevant difference has been defined between 2 and 6%.
Conclusion: MFM's structural validity, internal consistency, reliability, construct validity, convergent validity and responsiveness have been verified with moderate to high level of evidence.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10408216 | PMC |
| http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/JND-230001 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!