Movement Disorder Society Task Force Research Articles

Measurement of costs and scales for outcome evaluation in health economic studies of Parkinson's disease

Health economic studies in Parkinson's disease (PD) have become increasingly common in recent years. Because several methodologies and instruments have been used to assess cost and outcomes in PD, the Movement Disorder Society (MDS) commissioned a Task Force to assess their properties and make recommendations regarding their use. A systematic literature review was conducted to explore the use of those instruments in PD and to determine which should be selected for this review. We assessed approaches to evaluate cost of illness (COI), cost effectiveness, and cost utilities, which include the use of direct (standard gamble, time trade-off. and visual analogue scales) and indirect instruments to measure health status and utilities. No validated instruments/models were identified for the evaluation of COI or cost-effectiveness in patients with PD; therefore, no instruments in this group are recommended. Among utility instruments, only a few of these outcome instruments have been used in the PD population, and only limited psychometric data are available for these instruments with respect to PD. Because psychometric data for further utility instruments in conditions other than PD already exist, the standard gamble and time trade-off methods and the EQ-5D (a European quality-of-life health states instrument) and Health Utility Index instruments met the criteria for scales that are "recommended (with limitations)," but only the EQ-5D has been assessed in detail in PD patients. The MDS Task Force recommends further study of these instruments in the PD population to establish core psychometric properties. For the assessment of COI, the Task Force considers the development of a COI instrument specifically for PD, like that available for Alzheimer's disease.

Impact of Mild Cognitive Impairment on Health-Related Quality of Life in Parkinson's Disease

Background/Aims: To assess the impact of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or cognitive decline on health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) in Parkinson's disease (PD). Methods: HR-QOL measured by the Parkinson Disease Quality of Life Questionnaire (PDQ-39), MCI according to Movement Disorder Society Task Force criteria and cognitive decline from premorbid baseline were assessed in non-demented PD patients at 6 movement disorder clinics. Results: Among 137 patients, after adjusting for education, gender, disease duration, and Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale total score, MCI was associated with worse scores within the PDQ-39 dimension of communication (p = 0.008). Subjects were divided into tertiles of cognitive decline from premorbid level. Scores in the dimension of stigma were worst in the second tertile of cognitive decline (p = 0.03). MCI was associated with worse social support scores in the second tertile of cognitive decline (p = 0.008). Conclusion: MCI and cognitive decline from premorbid baseline are associated with reduced HR-QOL in communication, stigma, and social support domains. The cognitive decline from premorbid baseline modifies the association between MCI and HR-QOL in PD and knowing both will allow a better appreciation of difficulties patients face in daily life.

Cognitive Impairment in Parkinson Disease

Aim: To compare quality of life, level of disability, and caregiver burden in 3 groups of people with Parkinson disease (PD): those with mild cognitive impairment (PD-MCI), those with dementia (PDD), and those with no cognitive impairment (PD-NC). Background: Although the cognitive profile of those with PD-MCI and PDD has been well described, little is known about the personal and clinical impact of cognitive impairment and its impact on caregivers. Method: Quality of life and disability were measured in 3 groups of participants with PD (PD-NC, n = 54; PD-MCI, n = 48; and PDD, n = 25). The PD-MCI group was classified using Movement Disorder Society Task Force consensus criteria. Caregivers (n = 102) in the 3 groups were assessed using the Zarit Burden Inventory. Results: Both quality of life and caregiver burden were similar in the 2 groups without dementia but were significantly different in those with PDD. In contrast, global disability was progressively greater as cognition declined across the 3 PD groups: PD-NC < PD-MCI < PDD and on the Activities of Daily Living scale a step up in impairment was seen with the presence of any cognitive impairment. Conclusions: The presence of dementia significantly increases caregiver burden and decreases quality of life. However, even mild levels of cognitive impairment increase disability and overall functional impairment progresses in tandem with cognitive decline.

Comparison of Movement Disorder Society Criteria for Parkinson's Disease Dementia with Routine Clinical Neuropsychological Testing (PD4.006)

Objective: To compare diagnostic classification differences for Parkinson9s disease dementia (PDD) patients between the new Movement Disorder Society (MDS) criteria for detecting PDD and routine neuropsychological testing. Background Diagnostic criteria for PDD have been proposed by a MDS Task Force. MDS PDD diagnosis includes criteria based on a checklist (Level 1) and additional specific criteria based on more complete neuropsychological tests (Level II). Few studies have compared outcomes of these MDS criteria to the diagnosis of PDD based on routine neuropsychological testing that does not utilize the MDS criteria. Design/Methods: Parkinson9s disease (PD) subjects were recruited from those scheduled for neuropsychological testing at two specialty PD centers. All subjects were categorized as having PDD or no PDD based on routine neuropsychological test results and clinical judgment of the neuropsychologist. In addition, Level 1 and Level II MDS diagnostic criteria for PDD were applied to each subject based on the same test results by a blinded neurologist. Results: We tested 91 PD subjects, with mean age 66.3 (SD=9.7). All subjects classified as PDD by the neuropsychologists (n = 9) were also classified as having PDD using the MDS checklist criteria (Level 1). However, there were an additional 6 subjects diagnosed with PDD using the MDS Level II criteria who were classified as having no dementia by the neuropsychologists. These 6 cases had more significantly more education (15.5 vs 10.6 years), better MMSE scores (26.33 vs 20.4), and less impairment on several cognitive tests compared to the group concordant for PDD by both MDS criteria and the neuropsychologist designation. Conclusions: MDS Level II criteria diagnoses PDD more frequently compared to routine neuropsychological testing and may be more sensitive to impairment in cases with higher education levels and where the cognitive function is not as severely impaired. Supported by: Salary support for the Rush University Medical Center study participants was provided by the Parkinson9s Disease Foundation. Disclosure: Dr. Barton has received personal compensation for activities with Teva Neurosciences, Allergan, Inc., Merz Pharma, Lundbeck Research USA, Inc., Merck-Serono, IMPAX, Allergan and Parkinson Disease Foundation. Dr. Bernard has nothing to disclose. Dr. Stebbins has received personal compensation for activities with Impax Laboratories, Inc., Ceregene, Inc., Biovail Technologies, Ltd., Santhera Pharmaceuticals, and Ingenix Pharmaceutical Services. Dr. Stebbins has received research support from the National Institutes of Health, American Cancer Society, the Michael J. Fox Foundation, and Fragile-X Foundation. Dr. Goldman has received personal compensation for activities with Movement Disorder Society, American Geriatric Society, Johns Hopkins Dystonia and Spasticity Practicum as a speaker. Dr. Goldman has received research support from the Parkinson9s Disease Foundation and the National Institute of Health. Dr. Dubois has received personal compensation for activities with Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, Elan, Eli Lilly, Eisai, and Janssen as a consultantDr. Dubois has received personal compensation for serving on the advisory board of Bristol-Myers Squibb, Roche, Elan, Eli Lilly, Eisai, and Janssen.Dr. Dubois has received research support from Novartis and Sanofi-Aventis. Dr. Goetz has received personal compensation for activities with Asubio Pharmaceuticals Inc., Campbell Alliance, CNS Therapeutics, Curry Rockerfeller Group, Health Advances, Impax Pharmaceuticals, Ingenix, Juvantia Pharma LTD as a consultant and participant on an advisory board. Dr. Goetz has received personal compensation in an editorial capacity for Movement Disorders and Oxford University Press. Dr. Goetz has received research support from Michael J. Fox Foundation, National Institute of Health and Parkinson9s Disease Foundation.

Diagnostic criteria for mild cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease: Movement Disorder Society Task Force guidelines

Diagnostic criteria for mild cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease: Movement Disorder Society Task Force guidelines

Clinical validation of movement disorder society–recommended diagnostic criteria for Parkinson's disease with dementia

The objective of this work was to evaluate the Movement Disorders Society (MDS) Task Force-proposed screening checklist for detecting Parkinson's disease dementia (PD-D) in relation to full neuropsychological testing. An MDS Task Force has proposed diagnostic procedures for PD-D, which have not been fully validated against more extensive neuropsychological testing. PD subjects were recruited from 2 specialty centers. A neuropsychologist evaluated them for dementia as part of routine clinical care. Independent clinical neurologists administered the MDS PD-D screening checklist. Diagnosis of PD-D by the 2 methods was compared. Ninety-one PD subjects had a mean age of 66.3 (SD = 9.7) years and a mean PD duration of 8.8 (SD = 6.1) years. Seven subjects (7.7%) met all 8 screening checklist criteria from the MDS PD-D screening tool and were classified as probable PD-D. Fifteen (16.5%) subjects were classified as PD-D by full neuropsychological assessment. The screening checklist showed 100% specificity, but only 46.7% sensitivity, for diagnosing PD-D compared to the full neuropsychological assessment. PD-D cases missed by the PD-D screening tool were largely due to 2 checklist items that were not endorsed (absence of depression and Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE] scores <26). There was moderate agreement between these 2 methods for determination of PD-D (kappa = 0.59, P < .001). The MDS-PD-D screening checklist is highly accurate for detecting PD-D if all items are endorsed. However, for cases that do not meet these criteria, full neuropsychological testing is needed to differentiate PD-D from milder cognitive impairment. Revision of the checklist by altering or eliminating the 2 problematic checklist items may improve sensitivity.

The Movement Disorder Society Evidence‐Based Medicine Review Update: Treatments for the non‐motor symptoms of Parkinson's disease

The Movement Disorder Society (MDS) Task Force on Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) Review of Treatments for Parkinson's Disease (PD) was first published in 2002 and was updated in 2005 to cover clinical trial data up to January 2004 with the focus on motor symptoms of PD. In this revised version the MDS task force decided it was necessary to extend the review to non-motor symptoms. The objective of this work was to update previous EBM reviews on treatments for PD with a focus on non-motor symptoms. Level-I (randomized controlled trial, RCT) reports of pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions for the non-motor symptoms of PD, published as full articles in English between January 2002 and December 2010 were reviewed. Criteria for inclusion and ranking followed the original program outline and adhered to EBM methodology. For efficacy conclusions, treatments were designated: efficacious, likely efficacious, unlikely efficacious, non-efficacious, or insufficient evidence. Safety data were catalogued and reviewed. Based on the combined efficacy and safety assessment, Implications for clinical practice were determined using the following designations: clinically useful, possibly useful, investigational, unlikely useful, and not useful. Fifty-four new studies qualified for efficacy review while several other studies covered safety issues. Updated and new efficacy conclusions were made for all indications. The treatments that are efficacious for the management of the different non-motor symptoms are as follows: pramipexole for the treatment of depressive symptoms, clozapine for the treatment of psychosis, rivastigmine for the treatment of dementia, and botulinum toxin A (BTX-A) and BTX-B as well as glycopyrrolate for the treatment of sialorrhea. The practical implications for these treatments, except for glycopyrrolate, are that they are clinically useful. Since there is insufficient evidence of glycopyrrolate for the treatment of sialorrhea exceeding 1 week, the practice implication is that it is possibly useful. The treatments that are likely efficacious for the management of the different non-motor symptoms are as follows: the tricyclic antidepressants nortriptyline and desipramine for the treatment of depression or depressive symptoms and macrogol for the treatment of constipation. The practice implications for these treatments are possibly useful. For most of the other interventions there is insufficient evidence to make adequate conclusions on their efficacy. This includes the tricyclic antidepressant amitriptyline, all selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) reviewed (paroxetine, citalopram, sertraline, and fluoxetine), the newer antidepressants atomoxetine and nefazodone, pergolide, Ω-3 fatty acids as well as repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) for the treatment of depression or depressive symptoms; methylphenidate and modafinil for the treatment of fatigue; amantadine for the treatment of pathological gambling; donepezil, galantamine, and memantine for the treatment of dementia; quetiapine for the treatment of psychosis; fludrocortisone and domperidone for the treatment of orthostatic hypotension; sildenafil for the treatment of erectile dysfunction, ipratropium bromide spray for the treatment of sialorrhea; levodopa/carbidopa controlled release (CR), pergolide, eszopiclone, melatonin 3 to 5 mg and melatonin 50 mg for the treatment of insomnia and modafinil for the treatment of excessive daytime sleepiness. Due to safety issues the practice implication is that pergolide and nefazodone are not useful for the above-mentioned indications. Due to safety issues, olanzapine remains not useful for the treatment of psychosis. As none of the studies exceeded a duration of 6 months, the recommendations given are for the short-term management of the different non-motor symptoms. There were no RCTs that met inclusion criteria for the treatment of anxiety disorders, apathy, medication-related impulse control disorders and related behaviors other than pathological gambling, rapid eye movement (REM) sleep behavior disorder (RBD), sweating, or urinary dysfunction. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence for the treatment of these indications. This EBM review of interventions for the non-motor symptoms of PD updates the field, but, because several RCTs are ongoing, a continual updating process is needed. Several interventions and indications still lack good quality evidence, and these gaps offer an opportunity for ongoing research. © 2011 Movement Disorder Society.

Health‐related quality‐of‐life scales in Parkinson's disease: Critique and recommendations

Health-related quality of life is an important patient-reported outcome used in intervention trials and for monitoring the consequences of health status on physical, mental, and social domains. Parkinson's disease is a complex disorder that strongly affects patients' quality of life. Several health-related quality of life tools have been used in Parkinson's disease. A Movement Disorder Society Task Force was commissioned to rate the psychometric quality of available health-related quality of life scales as applied to Parkinson's disease. Following the methodology adopted by previous work of the Movement Disorder Society Task Force, a review of generic and specific health-related quality of life scales applied in studies on Parkinson's disease was completed. Considering the scales from 3 perspectives-use in Parkinson's disease, use by multiple research groups, and clinimetric properties-a final classification as "recommended," "suggested," or "listed" was applied to each reviewed instrument. Four generic scales (EuroQoL, Nottingham Health Profile, 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey, and Sickness Impact Profile) and 5 specific scales (39-Item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire, Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire Short Form, Parkinson's Disease Quality of Life Questionnaire, Parkinson's Impact Scale, and Scales for Outcomes in Parkinson's Disease-Psychosocial) reached the level of "recommended." The 39-item Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire is the most thoroughly tested and applied questionnaire. Three other generic measures (Quality of Life Questionnaire 15D, Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life-Direct Weighting, and World Health Organization Quality of Life Assessment Short Version) and the specific Parkinson's Disease Quality of Life Scale are "suggested." With a little additional effort in completing the stipulated requirements, they could reach the "recommended" level. At present there is a wide variety of health-related quality of life measures for application in the Parkinson's disease setting, and the task force does not recommend the development of a new scale. Selection of the most appropriate instrument for a particular objective requires consideration of the characteristics of each scale and the goals of the assessment.

Dementia associated with Parkinson’s disease: Applying the Movement Disorder Society Task Force criteria

BackgroundDiagnostic criteria and procedures for dementia in Parkinson’s disease (PDD) have been proposed by a Movement Disorders Society Task Force (MDS-TF). The objective of this study was to explore the utility of the new MDS-TF criteria and procedures in clinical practice. MethodsTwo hundred ninety nine PD patients (36.5% with PDD as per MDFS-TF criteria; 33.1% according the DSM-IV) were included in the study. A variety of standardized motor, cognitive, psychiatric, and global severity measures were administered. A multivariate logistic regression model was built to determine the variables producing discrepancy between the MDS-TF and DSM-IV criteria for PDD and the clinical features that distinguished false negative cases. ResultsAgreement between MDS-TF and DSM-IV criteria was substantial (87.3%; kappa = 0.72), but the DSM-IV criteria failed to identify 22% of patients fulfilling MDS-TF criteria. False negative cases were older and had more severe motor symptoms but less psychosis than those true non-demented PD. False positives had less severe motor symptoms than true PDD, although the difference did not reach statistical significance. ConclusionsOur findings suggest that the MDS-TF criteria are more sensitive than the DSM-IV for a diagnosis of PDD. Old age, absence of psychiatric symptoms, and severe motor impairment can hinder the diagnosis of PDD.

Fatigue rating scales critique and recommendations by the Movement Disorders Society task force on rating scales for Parkinson's disease

Fatigue has been shown to be a consistent and common problem in Parkinson's disease (PD) in multiple countries and cultures. It is one of the most disabling of all symptoms, including motor dysfunction, and appears early, often predating the onset of motor symptoms. Several studies of the epidemiology of fatigue have been published, often using different scales, but few on treatment. The Movement Disorder Society (MDS) commissioned a task force to assess available clinical rating scales, critique their psychometric properties, summarize their clinical properties, and evaluate the evidence in support of their use in clinical studies in PD. Six clinical researchers reviewed all studies published in peer reviewed journals of fatigue in PD, evaluated the scales' previous use, performance parameters, and quality of validation data, if available. Scales were rated according to criteria provided by the MDS. A scale was "recommended" if it has been used in clinical studies beyond the group that developed it, has been used in PD and psychometric studies have established that it is a valid, reliable and sensitive to change in people with PD. Requiring a scale to have demonstrated sensitivity to change in PD specifically rather than in other areas in order to attain a rating of "recommended" differs from the use of this term in previous MDS task force scale reviews. "Suggested" scales failed to meet all the criteria of a "recommended" scale, usually the criterion of sensitivity to change in a study of PD. Scales were "listed" if they had been used in PD studies but had little or no psychometric data to assess. Some scales could be used both to screen for fatigue as well as to assess fatigue severity, but some were only used to assess severity. The Fatigue Severity Scale was "recommended" for both screening and severity rating. The Fatigue Assessment Inventory, an expanded version of the Fatigue severity Scale, is "suggested" for both screening and severity. The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue was "recommended" for screening and "suggested" for severity. The Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory was "suggested" for screening and "recommended" for severity. The Parkinson Fatigue Scale was "recommended" for screening and "suggested" for severity rating. The Fatigue Severity Inventory was "listed" for both screening and severity. The Fatigue Impact Scale for Daily Use, an adaptation of the Fatigue Impact Scale was "listed" for screening and "suggested" for severity. Visual Analogue and Global Impression Scales are both "listed" for screening and severity. The committee concluded that current scales are adequate for fatigue studies in PD but that studies on sensitivity and specificity of the scales are still needed.

Scales to evaluate psychosis in Parkinson's disease

Hallucinations and psychotic behaviors are a frequent non-motor aspect of Parkinson's disease and its treatment. These behaviors usually do not occur in the presence of the physician and are therefore difficult to rate. Further, because of their bizarre nature, hallucinations are frequently underreported by patients, and caregivers are often unaware of them until they become problematic. A number of scales have been developed for rating these behaviors, most of them borrowed or adapted from assessment tools used in other psychotic disorders like schizophrenia. In the latter disorders, however, hallucinations and psychosis are phenomenologically different than the typical hallucinations of Parkinson's disease. The Movement Disorder Society Task Force on Parkinson's Disease Rating Scales has completed a systematic critique of scales used in clinical trials focusing on hallucinations and psychosis. In this critique, the following scales met the criteria to be classified as Recommended: Neuropsychiatric Inventory, Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, and Schedule for Assessment of Positive Symptoms. However, the Task Force felt that each of these scales has significant weaknesses and is insufficient to be considered a definitive rating tool. The Task Force officially recommended the development of a new scale to assess hallucinations and psychosis in Parkinson's disease. This effort is now ongoing with official endorsement by the Movement Disorder Society.

Dementia with Parkinson disease: Clinical diagnosis, neuropsychological aspects and treatment.

Dementia with Parkinson’s disease represents a controversial issue in the complex group of alpha-synucleinopathies. The author acknowledges the concept of a “continuum” between Parkinson disease’s (PD), Lewy body dementia (LBD), and dementia in Parkinson’s disease (PDD). However, the practicing neurologist needs to identify the phenotypic signs of each dementia. The treatment and prognosis are different in spite of the overlaps between them. The main aim of this review was to characterize the clinical diagnoses of dementia associated with Parkinson’s disease (PDD). Secondarily, the review discussed some epidemiological and neuropsychological issues. Selection of articles was not systematic and reflects the author’s opinion, where the main text selected was the recommendations from the Movement Disorder Society Task Force for PDD diagnosis. The Pub Med, OVID, and Proquest data bases were used for the search.

Diagnostic procedures for Parkinson's disease dementia: Recommendations from the movement disorder society task force

A preceding article described the clinical features of Parkinson's disease dementia (PD-D) and proposed clinical diagnostic criteria for "probable" and "possible" PD-D. The main focus of this article is to operationalize the diagnosis of PD-D and to propose practical guidelines based on a two level process depending upon the clinical scenario and the expertise of the evaluator involved in the assessment. Level I is aimed primarily at the clinician with no particular expertise in neuropsychological methods, but who requires a simple, pragmatic set of tests that are not excessively time-consuming. Level I can be used alone or in concert with Level II, which is more suitable when there is the need to specify the pattern and the severity on the dementia of PD-D for clinical monitoring, research studies or pharmacological trials. Level II tests can also be proposed when the diagnosis of PD-D remains uncertain or equivocal at the end of a Level I evaluation. Given the lack of evidence-based standards for some tests when applied in this clinical context, we have tried to make practical and unambiguous recommendations, based upon the available literature and the collective experience of the Task Force. We accept, however, that further validation of certain tests and modifications in the recommended cut off values will be required through future studies.

Evidence‐based medical review update: Pharmacological and surgical treatments of Parkinson's disease: 2001 to 2004

The objective of this study is to update a previous evidence-based medicine (EBM) review on Parkinson's disease (PD) treatments, adding January 2001 to January 2004 information. The Movement Disorder Society (MDS) Task Force prepared an EBM review of PD treatments covering data up to January 2001. The authors reviewed Level I (randomized clinical trials) reports of pharmacological and surgical interventions for PD, published as full articles in English (January 2001-January 2004). Inclusion criteria and ranking followed the original program and adhered to EBM methodology. For Efficacy Conclusions, treatments were designated Efficacious, Likely Efficacious, Non-Efficacious, or Insufficient Data. Four clinical indications were considered for each intervention: prevention of disease progression; treatment of Parkinsonism, as monotherapy and as adjuncts to levodopa where indicated; prevention of motor complications; treatment of motor complications. Twenty-seven new studies qualified for efficacy review, and others covered new safety issues. Apomorphine, piribedil, unilateral pallidotomy, and subthalamic nucleus stimulation moved upward in efficacy ratings. Rasagiline, was newly rated as Efficacious monotherapy for control of Parkinsonism. New Level I data moved human fetal nigral transplants, as performed to date, from Insufficient Data to Non- efficacious for the treatment of Parkinsonism, motor fluctuations, and dyskinesias. Selegiline was reassigned as Non-efficacious for the prevention of dyskinesias. Other designations did not change. In a field as active in clinical trials as PD, frequent updating of therapy-based reviews is essential. We consider a 3-year period a reasonable time frame for published updates and are working to establish a Web-based mechanism to update the report in an ongoing manner.

Movement Disorder Society Task Force report on the Hoehn and Yahr staging scale: status and recommendations.

The Movement Disorder Society Task Force for Rating Scales for Parkinson's disease (PD) prepared a critique of the Hoehn and Yahr scale (HY). Strengths of the HY scale include its wide utilization and acceptance. Progressively higher stages correlate with neuroimaging studies of dopaminergic loss, and high correlations exist between the HY scale and some standardized scales of motor impairment, disability, and quality of life. Weaknesses include the scale's mixing of impairment and disability and its non-linearity. Because the HY scale is weighted heavily toward postural instability as the primary index of disease severity, it does not capture completely impairments or disability from other motor features of PD and gives no information on nonmotor problems. Direct clinimetric testing of the HY scale has been very limited, but the scale fulfills at least some criteria for reliability and validity, especially for the midranges of the scale (Stages 2-4). Although a "modified HY scale" that includes 0.5 increments has been adopted widely, no clinimetric data are available on this adaptation. The Task Force recommends that: (1) the HY scale be used in its original form for demographic presentation of patient groups; (2) when the HY scale is used for group description, medians and ranges should be reported and analysis of changes should use nonparametric methods; (3) in research settings, the HY scale is useful primarily for defining inclusion/exclusion criteria; (4) to retain simplicity, clinicians should "rate what you see" and therefore incorporate comorbidities when assigning a HY stage; and (5) because of the wide usage of the modified HY scale with 0.5 increments, this adaptation warrants clinimetric testing. Without such testing, however, the original five-point scales should be maintained.