Scandinavian journal of rheumatology · 2003
The assessment of fatigue in primary Sjögren's syndrome.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lwin Christine T T, Bishay Mark, Platts Rosmary G, Booth David A, Bowman Simon J
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Disabling fatigue is a prominent feature of primary Sjögren's syndrome (PSS). We evaluated a number of questionnaires for their ability to discriminate fatigue in PSS from that in other rheumatic disorders and healthy controls.
METHODS: 33 female caucasian patients with PSS, 45 with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), 16 with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and 30 controls completed self-administered questionnaires including; Visual Analogue Scales (VAS), the Chalder Fatigue Scale (CFS), the Nottingham Health Profile (NHP) and the Medical Outcomes Short Form 36 Questionnaire (SF-36).
RESULTS: All patient groups scored significantly worse than controls on the 'Energy' dimension of the NHP, the fatigue VAS and the 'Vitality' domain of the SF-36. No significant differences were observed between PSS patients and controls using the CFS.
CONCLUSIONS: The NHP. VAS and SF-36 are useful in identifying fatigue in these rheumatic disorders. Further work is required to identify the characteristic features of fatigue in these conditions.
METHODS: 33 female caucasian patients with PSS, 45 with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), 16 with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and 30 controls completed self-administered questionnaires including; Visual Analogue Scales (VAS), the Chalder Fatigue Scale (CFS), the Nottingham Health Profile (NHP) and the Medical Outcomes Short Form 36 Questionnaire (SF-36).
RESULTS: All patient groups scored significantly worse than controls on the 'Energy' dimension of the NHP, the fatigue VAS and the 'Vitality' domain of the SF-36. No significant differences were observed between PSS patients and controls using the CFS.
CONCLUSIONS: The NHP. VAS and SF-36 are useful in identifying fatigue in these rheumatic disorders. Further work is required to identify the characteristic features of fatigue in these conditions.