You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Short report
A modified peripheral neuropathy scale: the Overall Neuropathy Limitations Scale
  1. R C Graham1,
  2. R A C Hughes2
  1. 1Division of Applied Biomedical Research, King’s College London, London, UK
  2. 2Department of Clinical Neuroscience, King’s College London
  1. Correspondence to:
 Professor R A C Hughes
 Department of Clinical Neuroscience, King’s College London School of Medicine, Guy’s Hospital, London SE1 1UL, UK; richard.a.hughes{at}kcl.ac.uk

Abstract

A new peripheral neuropathy activities measure, the Overall Neuropathy Limitations Scale (ONLS), was derived by modifying the Overall Disability Sum Score (ODSS) slightly. Its inter-rater reliability was found to be high and its correlation with the ODSS (r = 0.97), 36-item Short Form Questionnaire Physical Component Summary Score, and participation and impairment measures was significant. Acceptable responsiveness (standardised response mean 0.76) was shown by the ONLS. The results obtained from the questionnaire agreed closely with those obtained from observation of the tasks on the ONLS, but were not equivalent. The simplicity of the ODSS is shared by the ONLS, but the ONLS has better content validity and less ceiling effect, which may make it more useful for clinical practice and research.

  • CIDP, chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy
  • GBS, Guillain–Barré syndrome
  • ICC, intraclass correlation coefficient
  • ODSS, Overall Disability Sum Score
  • ONLS, Overall Neuropathy Limitations Scale
  • SF-36, 36-item Short Form

https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.2005.081547

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • See Editorial Commentary, p 899

    • Funding: This study was funded by the Guy’s and St Thomas’ Charity.

    • Competing interests: None.

    • Ethical approval: The Guy’s Hospital Research Ethics Committee and Guy’s and St Thomas’ Audit Committee approved the study.

    • Published Online First 30 March 2006

    Linked Articles