Cargando…

Disability assessment using Google Maps

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the concordance between Google Maps® application (GM®) and clinical practice measurements of ambulatory function (e.g., Ambulation Score (AS) and respective Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS)) in people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a cro...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lavorgna, Luigi, Iaffaldano, Pietro, Abbadessa, Gianmarco, Lanzillo, Roberta, Esposito, Sabrina, Ippolito, Domenico, Sparaco, Maddalena, Cepparulo, Simone, Lus, Giacomo, Viterbo, Rosa, Clerico, Marinella, Trojsi, Francesca, Ragonese, Paolo, Borriello, Giovanna, Signoriello, Elisabetta, Palladino, Raffaele, Moccia, Marcello, Brigo, Francesco, Troiano, Maria, Tedeschi, Gioacchino, Bonavita, Simona
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8211455/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34142263
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10072-021-05389-7
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the concordance between Google Maps® application (GM®) and clinical practice measurements of ambulatory function (e.g., Ambulation Score (AS) and respective Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS)) in people with multiple sclerosis (pwMS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a cross-sectional multicenter study. AS and EDSS were calculated using GM® and routine clinical methods; the correspondence between the two methods was assessed. A multinomial logistic model is investigated which demographic (age, sex) and clinical features (e.g., disease subtype, fatigue, depression) might have influenced discrepancies between the two methods. RESULTS: Two hundred forty-three pwMS were included; discrepancies in AS and in EDDS assessments between GM® and routine clinical methods were found in 81/243 (33.3%) and 74/243 (30.4%) pwMS, respectively. Progressive phenotype (odds ratio [OR] = 2.8; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1–7.11, p = 0.03), worse fatigue (OR = 1.03; 95% CI 1.01–1.06, p = 0.01), and more severe depression (OR = 1.1; 95% CI 1.04–1.17, p = 0.002) were associated with discrepancies between GM® and routine clinical scoring. CONCLUSION: GM® could easily be used in a real-life clinical setting to calculate the AS and the related EDSS scores. GM® should be considered for validation in further clinical studies. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10072-021-05389-7.