Skip to main content
International Journal of MS Care logoLink to International Journal of MS Care
. 2024 May 29;26(Q3):134–139. doi: 10.7224/1537-2073.2022-030

Hand Grip Strength as a Predictive Tool for Upper Extremity Functionality, Balance, and Quality of Life in People With Multiple Sclerosis

Meral Seferoğlu 1, Meliha Kasapoğlu Aksoy 1,, Abdulkadir Tunç 2
PMCID: PMC11168298  PMID: 38872997

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Upper extremity strength and function are rarely assessed in routine multiple sclerosis (MS) care. This study aimed to evaluate hand muscle strength and functionality in individuals with MS and investigate correlations with upper extremity function, cognitive status, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), and balance.

METHODS:

A cross-sectional study was conducted with 45 consecutive individuals with MS between the ages of 18 and 65. Upper limb motor strength was evaluated using a hand grip strength dynamometer. Upper limb functional capacity was assessed using the Nine-Hole Peg Test (9HPT) and the Duruoz Hand Index (DHI). Balance, coordination, and falls were measured with the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Falls Efficacy Scale (FES), and the 30-Second Chair Stand Test (30CST). Cognitive function was evaluated using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment instrument and the Symbol Digit Modalities Test. Level of HRQOL was assessed using the self-reported 54-item MS Quality of Life-54 questionnaire.

RESULTS:

Out of the 45 participants (80% women, mean age 36.6 ± 8.6 years), higher hand grip dynamometer measures were strongly correlated with better DHI, 9HPT, BBS, FES, and 30CST scores. In the regression analysis, a 1-unit increase in dynamometer measures led to a 0.383 increase in overall HRQOL score.

CONCLUSIONS:

This study demonstrates that increased hand grip strength (HGS) is associated with better hand functionality, balance, and HRQOL in individuals with MS. It provides evidence to support more systematic measurement of HGS in the care of people with MS.

Keywords: upper extremity, grip, motor function, dynamometry, hand function


Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a central nervous system disease characterized by various neurological disabilities resulting from progressive inflammatory and neurodegenerative processes.1 People with MS often experience symptoms that significantly impact their quality of life (QOL), including muscle weakness, sensory deficits, and cognitive impairment.2-4

Approximately 66% of individuals with MS experience upper limb motor impairments, greatly affecting daily activities.5 Hand dysfunction, along with fatigue, ambulation, and cognitive decline, has been associated with increased unemployment, which highlights the importance of addressing these deficits in MS.6 Despite the disabling effects and negative impact on QOL, little is known about the exact frequency and severity of upper extremity dysfunction in individuals with MS. Additionally, accurately assessing upper limb movements is challenging due to their inherent variability.

Hand grip strength (HGS) is a reliable measurement of upper extremity muscle strength to determine functional capacity. It reflects the force generated from the combined contraction of extrinsic hand muscles.7 HGS measurement is recommended as a modality to assess muscle strength and is the simplest method for evaluating muscle functions in clinical practice.8 Previous studies have shown that increased HGS is strongly associated with preserved mobility, functional status, higher levels of daily living activities, and decreased disability.9-11

With an incidence of 40% to 65% in individuals with MS, cognitive impairment is reported to be a predictor of long-term disability. The severity of cognitive decline appears to be related to patients’ ages and levels of physical disability, and certain cognitive aspects can predict functional status in MS.12 Impaired balance is also a disabling symptom that negatively impacts independence and autonomy, leading to falls and injuries. It can be present even in the early stages of the disease course, sometimes even in the absence of physical disability.13 People with MS tend to have lower health-related quality of life (HRQOL) levels.4 Muscle weakness, balance and gait abnormalities, fatigue, and other functional deficits significantly contribute to their lower HRQOL.4,14

This study aims to evaluate HGS and hand functionality in individuals with MS and investigate their correlations with cognitive status, HRQOL, and balance states in these individuals.

METHODS

Participants

This cross-sectional analytical study was conducted in the neurology department of Bursa Yüksek İhtisas Education and Research Hospital (Bursa, Turkey) from February 1, 2020 to May 1, 2020. Ethical approval was obtained from the institutional research committee, and all subjects provided written informed consent.

Physical characteristic data obtained included age, gender, time since diagnosis, and current treatments. Disability was evaluated by a neurologist using the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS).15 The participants had a confirmed diagnosis of relapsing-remitting MS according to the revised McDonald criteria16 and an EDSS score between 0 and 5.5. Participants were between the ages of 18 and 65.

Exclusion criteria were current pregnancy, having an MS relapse within the preceding 3 months, sensorial problems not caused by MS, unilateral sensory perception loss, upper motor neuron injury (eg, stroke survivors), history of peripheral neuropathy, and upper limb orthopedic limitations that could interfere with study procedures.

Quantitative Measures

All assessments were performed by the same physician in a quiet, well-illuminated room.

Upper Limb Functional Capacity: Hand Grip Strength

Upper limb motor analysis was assessed in a seated position with the patient's feet on the ground. The HGS of the dominant hand was measured by the Jamar Plus+ Digital Hand Dynamometer (Sammons Preston). Since the reliability and validity of the Jamar dynamometer has been evaluated as high, it has been considered a gold standard in the assessment of grip strength.17 Hand dominance was determined by asking the patients which hand they used for writing. The test was performed in a seated position with the shoulder of the tested arm adducted, the elbow flexed at 90°, and the forearm and wrist set in neutral position. Grip strength tests were performed 3 times with 1-minute intervals between each, and the average of the 3 measurements was calculated.18

The Nine-Hole Peg Test (9HPT) and the Duruoz Hand Index (DHI) were used to evaluate upper limb functional capacity. The 9HPT is a well-known, standardized, quantitative test of upper limb function. It has a strong test-retest reliability for individuals with MS.19 The test was performed in a seated position with the dominant hand. The chronometer was started as soon as the patient touched the first peg. The chronometer was stopped when the last peg hit the container.

The DHI is an 18-item self-report questionnaire designed to evaluate activity limitations of the hand. It was first developed for individuals with rheumatoid arthritis.20 Questions are grouped in 5 domains: in the kitchen (8), dressing (2), hygiene (2), in the office (2), and other (1). The patient is instructed to answer each question in terms of the level of difficulty they experience when completing various tasks without help from another person or assistive device. Individual items are scored on a 6-point Likert scale where 0 is without difficulty and 5 is impossible. The 18 individual scores are summed to obtain a composite score. The total score ranges from 0 to 90 with higher scores indicating poorer hand functioning.

Gait and Balance

The Berg Balance Scale (BBS), Falls Efficacy Scale (FES), and the 30-Second Chair to Stand Test (30CST) were used to assess balance, coordination, and falls. The BBS has been validated in several populations and cutoff scores have been established to identify the risk of falls and the need for a gait aid for ambulation.21,22

The FES questionnaire has 10 listed activities with responses on a Likert scale from 1, very confident at performing the listed activities, to 10, not confident at all. The total FES score was obtained from the sum of these 10 items, ranging from 10 to 100.23

The 30CST was used to evaluate leg strength and endurance. This test was developed to overcome the floor effect that older adults expereinced with the 5 to 10 repetitions of the Sit to Stand Test.24

Quality of Life

The self-reported 54-item MS Quality of Life questionnaire (MSQOL-54) supplements the generic 36-Item Short Form Health Survey with 18 disease-specific questions that measure social and cognitive functioning, sexual functioning, pain, energy, health anxiety, and overall quality of life. Aggregate scores are generated for mental HRQOL (MCS-54) and for physical HRQOL (PCS-54). The standardized scores range from 0 to 100 and higher scores indicate better HRQOL.25,26

Cognitive Assessment

The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and the Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) were used to evaluate participants’ cognitive function. The MoCA is a 30-point test that assesses several cognitive domains, including visuospatial/executive functions, naming, memory, attention, language, abstraction, and orientation.27 The SDMT28 is a digit substitution test that examines attention, visual scanning speed, perceptual speed, and tracking and is very sensitive to various neurological disorders. It has become the most commonly used neuropsychological test of processing speed in MS.29

Statistical Analyses

Statistical analyses were carried out using the SPSS/PC software (version 23.0). Descriptive statistical methods (frequency, percentage, mean, standard deviation, median, min-max) were used to assess the study data. The Shapiro-Wilk test confirmed that the data showed normal distribution. The independent samples t test was used to compare quantitative data according to groups. The relationship between the variables in the patient group was examined by the Pearson correlation. Analysis of categorical data according to groups was performed using the χ2 test. Stepwise multiple regression analysis was used to evaluate the relationship among factors. Significance level was taken as P < .05.

RESULTS

A total of 80 persons with a diagnosis of relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS) for at least 1 year were screened for eligibility. Of the 80, 35 were excluded from the analysis (32 patients did not meet inclusion-exclusion criteria and 3 declined to participate). Of the 45 persons included, 36 were women (80%); the mean age was 36.6 ± 8.6 (range 21-57) years. The mean disease duration was 7.1 ± 6.1 (range 1-23) years. Forty-two (93.3%) patients were using an MS-immunomodulating therapy: 12 glatiramer acetate, 12 interferon, 16 oral therapies (fingolimod, teriflunamid, dimethyl fumarate), and 2 ocrelizumab. The average EDSS for the RRMS group as a whole was 1.9 ± 1.3 (range 0-5.5).

All parameters were evaluated with the Mann-Whitney U test. The median value of the 9HPT repeated was 22.1 (16.8-21.11) for women and 25.6 (19.7-35.1) for men and showed a significant difference according to sex (P = .027). The median physical health value was 57.5 (20-100) in women and 90 (35-100) in men, thus, it was significantly higher in men (P = .048). There was a significant difference between the sexes in terms of sexual function, with a median value of 66.7 (0-100) for women and 100 (8.3-100) for men (P = .018). The satisfaction in sexual function median was 50 (0-100) for women and 100 (0-100) for men (P = .046). When the mean value of general QOL was compared by sex, men (72 ± 15) had significantly higher results than women (57.8 ± 18.8) (P = .041). Women with MS generated less force (45.6 ± 21) than men (70.5 ± 26.7) as measured by the dynamometer grasp performance, demonstrating a strength difference with a moderate effect size (P = .04). Other variables did not differ according to sex (P > .050) (See TABLE 1).

TABLE 1.

Differences Between Male and Female Participants

A. Test score, median (min-max)
Female (n = 36) Male (n = 9) U test P value
30CST 11 (2-30) 12 (6-25) 136 .49
DHI 4 (0-54) 0 (0-35) 140.5 .52
BBS 52.5 (13-56) 56 (22-56) 125.5 .29
FES 26.5 (16-60) 21 (18-36) 102 .09
9HPT 24.1 (18.6-44) 28.7 (17.8-35.9) 96 .06
9HPT/R 22.1 (16.8-21.11) 25.6 (19.7-35.1) 84 .027
Physical health 57.5 (20-100) 90 (35-100) 92.5 .048
Role limitations (physical cause) 75 (0-100) 50 (0-100) 152 .77
Role limitations (emotional cause) 66.7 (0-100) 66.7 (0-100) 161 .98
Emotional well-being 52 (28-72) 48 (36-100) 131.5 .38
Cognitive function 55 (0-100) 70 (25-90) 122 .26
Sexual function 66.7 (0-100) 100 (8.3-100) 80 .018
Change in health 50 (25-100) 50 (25-100) 141.5 .54
Satisfaction with sexual function 50 (0-100) 100 (0-100) 94 .046
MSQOL, physical health composite 51.1 (27.4-154.9) 70.8 (32.3-85.1) 108 .13
B. Test score (mean ± SD)
Female (n = 36) Male (n = 9) T test P value
Dynamometer 45.6 ± 21 70.5 ± 26.7 −3.002 .004
MoCA 23.1 ± 4.8 23.4 ± 2.1 −0.220 .83
SDMT 31.3 ± 11.4 31.2 ± 6.2 0.014 .99
MSQOL, pain 57.3 ± 28.4 66.1 ± 22.3 0.859 .40
MSQOL, energy 43.3 ± 23.1 52.7 ± 14.2 −1.164 .25
MSQOL, health perceptions 50.1 ± 25 57 ± 16.5 −0.782 .44
MSQOL, social function 66.5 ± 24.3 74.2 ± 16.8 −0.893 .38
MSQOL, health distress 58.4 ± 26.2 67.2 ± 24.3 −0.920 .36
MSQOL, overall QOL 57.8 ± 18.8 72 ± 15 −2.104 .04
MSQOL, mental health composite 54.6 ± 18.8 63.3 ± 18.4 −1.249 .22

Note: P < .05 was statistically significant.

9HPT, Nine-Hole PegTest; 9HPT/R, Nine-Hole Peg Test repeated dominant hand; 30CST, 30-Second Chair to Stand Test; BBS, Berg Balance Scale; DHI, Duruoz Hand Index; FES Falls Efficacy Scale; MoCA, Montreal Cognitive Assessment; MSQOL, MS Quality of Life questionnaire; QOL, quality of life; SDMT, Symbol Digit Modalities Test; T test, independent samples t test; U test, Mann Whitney U test.

Hand grip dynamometer measurements were strongly correlated with DHI (P = .001), 9HPT (P = .018), BBS (P = .001), FES (P < .001), and 30CST (P = .001) scores, but not with EDSS (P = .45) or MoCA test (P = .251) scores. Additionally, the SDMT was significantly correlated with 9HPT (P = .013), DHI (P = .006), BBS (P = .021), and 30CST (P = .003) scores, but not with grip strength measurements (P = .109) (See TABLE 2).

TABLE 2.

Correlation Analysis of Upper Limb Strength, Balance, and Cognition Tests

Dynamometer DHI 9HPT/R 9HPT BBS 30CST FES MoCA
DHI r −0.467
P .001
9HPT r −0.352 0.487 0.804
P .018 0.001 <0.001
9HPT/R r −0.377 0.482
P .011 0.001
BBS r 0.472 −0.746 −0.390 −0.432
P .001 <0.001 0.008 0.003
30CST r 0.468 −0.543 −0.555 −0.563 0.698
P .001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
FES r −0.529 0.378 0.347 0.411 −0.485 −0.376
P <.001 0.010 0.019 0.005 0.001 0.011
MoCA r 0.251 −0.239 −0.425 −0.191 0.069 0.167 −0.365
P .096 0.113 0.004 0.210 0.654 0.272 0.014
SDMT r 0.242 −0.403 −0.441 −0.367 0.344 0.438 −0.285 0.531
P .109 0.006 0.002 0.013 0.021 0.003 0.058 <0.001
EDSS r −0.116 0.188 0.248 0.276 −0.324 −0.320 0.151 −0.071
P .45 0.22 0.10 0.07 0.03 0.03 0.32 0.64

Notes: P < .05 is statistically significant.

9HPT, Nine-Hole PegTest; 9HPT/R, Nine-Hole PegTest repeated dominant hand; 30CST, 30-Second Chair to Stand Test; BBS, Berg Balance Scale; DHI, Duruoz Hand Index; EDSS, Expanded Disability Status Scale; FES, Falls Efficacy Scale; MoCA, Montreal Cognitive Assessment; P, P value; QOL, quality of life; r, Spearman correlation coefficient; SDMT, Symbol Digit Modalities Test.

Dynamometer measurements were found to be statistically significant in predicting overall QOL, with each unit increase resulting in an increase in overall QOL score of 0.383 (P = .001, SI = 0.104, R2 = 0.523 Stepwise Method).

DISCUSSION

The present study was conducted to draw attention to the hand muscle strength and functionality in people with MS and to investigate its association with balance, cognition, and QOL. We found strong correlations between hand grip dynamometer measures and hand functionality tests (DHI, 9HPT), as well as balance measures (BBS, FES, 30CST). Regression analysis revealed that higher dynamometer scores were significantly correlated with better QOL.

Previous studies have shown that upper limb motor function is significantly affected by the level of disability in people with MS.30,31 In the Dubuisson et al study, 95% of people with MS considered upper limb function to be more important than lower limb function.32 There are still no standardized, uniform disability scales to evaluate upper limb functionality in people with MS.30 In our study, we used the DHI and 9HPT to assess upper extremity functionality and the Jamar Plus+ Digital Hand Dynamometer to evaluate HGS. Although the HGS test was originally designed for patients undergoing hand surgery, it has been shown to have a strong association with decreased physical fitness and reduced muscle strength.33 We observed that increased HGS was strongly linked to better upper extremity function and balance but not with cognitive status and disability scores. It was positively correlated with QOL.

As reported in previous studies, people with MS generally exhibit lower HGS due to motor weakness.34,35 It has been demonstrated that a change of 5.5 kg (12 pounds) or more in hand grip strength and 20% or more in the 9HPT falls beyond the range of day-to-day variability and reliably indicates a true change in functionality for people with MS.36,37 Similar to our study, research has also shown that a deficit in hand grip strength negatively impacts QOL and leads to subsequent dependence for those with MS.38,39 A study by Aristotelous et al also showed that hand grip strength was not associated with cognitive performance, but was linked to HRQOL, supporting our findings.40 While most studies have focused on evaluating lower extremity strength due to its impact on patients with mild disability, our study highlights the growing importance of upper extremity strength in the later stages of MS, especially when patients require walking aids.39 However, we believe that the earlier stages of the disease are more appropriate for evaluating upper limb strength and functionality. Our study also demonstrates that hand function or upper limb functionality constitutes a separate disability area that is distinct from the EDSS, which can significantly affect QOL and merits further investigation in future studies.

Cognitive impairment has been reported in up to 65% of individuals with MS,40,41 and in our study, cognitive status was significantly correlated with hand functionality and balance tests, but not with hand muscle strength, similar to the study of Aristotelous et al.40 Previous literature suggests that increased functional capacity is linked to better cognition, possibly due to increased blood flow to the brain, improved cardiometabolic health, and reduced chronic inflammation levels.41 However, conflicting results exist,42,43 necessitating further studies with larger MS populations, especially focusing on upper limb function evaluations.

Both the mental and physical components of HRQOL are reported to be negatively affected in people with MS.44 Reduced HRQOL was associated with fatigue, depression, and disability in a previous study.45 In addition, cognitive decline was shown to negatively affect HRQOL independent of physical disability.46 Consistent with previous studies, higher disability scores indicated lower sexual functions, satisfaction with sexual function, overall QOL, and physical health composite scores in our study. Increased HGS and younger age indicated a better QOL, as expected.

Some limitations should be considered when interpreting our results, including the cross-sectional design, which limits conclusions about the direction of the association and precludes any inferences of causality or temporality. The study sample consisted of people with MS, so it may not fully represent the entire MS population. Low sample size and inclusion of only ambulatory persons with an EDSS score of up to 5.5 were other limitations.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the importance of hand muscle strength and functionality in individuals with MS and its correlation with their cognitive status, balance, and HRQOL. Enhancing hand functionality and muscle strength can significantly impact independence, daily activities, and QOL for people with MS. Loss prevention and early restoration of hand function should be emphasized before the onset of significant morbidity. Further investigations are necessary to identify the most useful hand functionality or muscle strength test as an outcome measure in clinical trials of neuroprotective or neuroreparative therapies in MS. ■

PRACTICE POINTS

  • Hand grip strength is easy to measure with a dynamometer, yet often overlooked in multiple sclerosis care.

  • In our study, hand grip strength was strongly correlated with measures of upper extremity function, balance, falls efficacy, and quality of life.

  • Hand grip strength could be a useful predictor of overall function and quality of life in people with multiple sclerosis and it is easy to integrate into routine clinical assessments.

Footnotes

Conflict of Interest: The authors do not have any financial or nonfinancial interests directly or indirectly related to the work submitted for publication.

REFERENCES

  • 1.Dilokthornsakul P, Valuck RJ, Nair KV, Corboy JR, Allen RR, Campbell JD. Multiple sclerosis prevalence in the United States commercially insured population. Neurology. 2016;86(11):1014–1021. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000002469. doi: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Dogru Huzmeli E, Duman T. Somatosensory impairments in patients with multiple sclerosis: association with dynamic postural control and upper extremity motor function. Somatosens Mot Res. 2020;37(2):117–124. doi: 10.1080/08990220.2020.1753685. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Jongen PJ, Ter Horst AT, Brands AM. Cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis. Minerva medica. 2012;103(2):73–96. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Patti F, Cacopardo M, Palermo F, et al. Health-related quality of life and depression in an Italian sample of multiple sclerosis patients. J Neurol Sci. 2003;211(1-2):55–62. doi: 10.1016/s0022-510x(03)00040-6. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Spooren AI, Timmermans AA, Seelen HA. Motor training programs of arm and hand in patients with MS according to different levels of the ICF: a systematic review. BMC Neurol. 2012;12:49. doi: 10.1186/1471-2377-12-49. doi: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Julian LJ, Vella L, Vollmer T, Hadjimichael O, Mohr DC. Employment in multiple sclerosis. Exiting and re-entering the work force. J Neurol. 2008;255(9):1354–1360. doi: 10.1007/s00415-008-0910-y. doi: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Norman K, Stobäus N, Smoliner C, et al. Determinants of hand grip strength, knee extension strength and functional status in cancer patients. Clin Nutr. 2010;29(5):586–591. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2010.02.007. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Bohannon RW. Hand-grip dynamometry predicts future outcomes in aging adults. J Geriatr Phys Ther. 2008;31(1):3–10. doi: 10.1519/00139143-200831010-00002. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Velghe A, De Buyser S, Noens L, Demuynck R, Petrovic M. Hand grip strength as a screening tool for frailty in older patients with haematological malignancies. Acta Clin Belg. 2016;71(4):227–230. doi: 10.1080/17843286.2016.1162381. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Nevill AM, Holder RL. Modelling handgrip strength in the presence of confounding variables: results from the Allied Dunbar National Fitness Survey. Ergonomics. 2000;43(10):1547–1558. doi: 10.1080/001401300750003970. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Mancilla S E, Ramos F S, Morales B P. Fuerza de prensión manual según edad, género y condición funcional en adultos mayores Chilenos entre 60 y 91 años [Association between handgrip strength and functional performance in Chilean older people] Rev Med Chil. 2016;144(5):598–603. doi: 10.4067/S0034-98872016000500007. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Ruano L, Portaccio E, Goretti B, et al. Age and disability drive cognitive impairment in multiple sclerosis across disease subtypes. Mult Scler. 2017;23(9):1258–1267. doi: 10.1177/1352458516674367. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Martin CL, Phillips BA, Kilpatrick TJ, et al. Gait and balance impairment in early multiple sclerosis in the absence of clinical disability. Mult Scler. 2006;12(5):620–628. doi: 10.1177/1352458506070658. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Lobentanz IS, Asenbaum S, Vass K, et al. Factors influencing quality of life in multiple sclerosis patients: disability, depressive mood, fatigue and sleep quality. Acta Neurol Scand. 2004;110(1):6–13. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0404.2004.00257.x. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Kurtzke JF. Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: an expanded disability status scale (EDSS) Neurology. 1983;33(11):1444–1452. doi: 10.1212/wnl.33.11.1444. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Thompson AJ, Banwell BL, Barkhof F, et al. Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: 2017 revisions of the McDonald criteria. Lancet Neurol. 2018;17(2):162–173. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30470-2. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Shechtman O, Gestewitz L, Kimble C. Reliability and validity of the DynEx dynamometer. J Hand Ther. 2005;18(3):339–347. doi: 10.1197/j.jht.2005.04.002. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Roberts HC, Denison HJ, Martin HJ, et al. A review of the measurement of grip strength in clinical and epidemiological studies: towards a standardised approach. Age Ageing. 2011;40(4):423–429. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afr051. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Paltamaa J, West H, Sarasoja T, Wikström J, Mälkiä E. Reliability of physical functioning measures in ambulatory subjects with MS. Physiother Res Int. 2005;10(2):93–109. doi: 10.1002/pri.30. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Duruöz MT, Cerrahoglu L, Dincer-Turhan Y, Kürsat S. Hand function assessment in patients receiving haemodialysis. Swiss Med Wkly. 2003;133(31-32):433–438. doi: 10.4414/smw.2003.10216. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Berg KO, Wood-Dauphinee SL, Williams JI, Maki B. Measuring balance in the elderly: validation of an instrument. Can J Public Health. 1992;83(suppl 2):S7–S11. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Stevenson TJ, Connelly DM, Murray JM, Huggett D, Overend T. Threshold Berg Balance Scale scores for gait-aid use in elderly subjects: a secondary analysis. Physiother Can. 2010;62(2):133–140. doi: 10.3138/physio.62.2.133. doi: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Tinetti ME, Mendes de Leon CF, Doucette JT, Baker DI. Fear of falling and fall-related efficacy in relationship to functioning among community-living elders. J Gerontol. 1994;49(3):M140–M147. doi: 10.1093/geronj/49.3.m140. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Jones CJ, Rikli RE, Beam WC. A 30-s chair-stand test as a measure of lower body strength in community-residing older adults. Res Q Exerc Sport. 1999;70(2):113–119. doi: 10.1080/02701367.1999.10608028. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Vickrey BG, Hays RD, Harooni R, Myers LW, Ellison GW. A health-related quality of life measure for multiple sclerosis. Qual Life Res. 1995;4(3):187–206. doi: 10.1007/BF02260859. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Ware JE., Jr SF-36 health survey update. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000;25(24):3130–3139. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00008. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Nasreddine ZS, Phillips NA, Bédirian V, et al. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005;53(4):695–699. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2005.53221.x. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Drake AS, Weinstock-Guttman B, Morrow SA, Hojnacki D, Munschauer FE, Benedict RH. Psychometrics and normative data for the Multiple Sclerosis Functional Composite: replacing the PASAT with the Symbol Digit Modalities Test. Mult Scler. 2010;16(2):228–237. doi: 10.1177/1352458509354552. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Costa SL, Genova HM, DeLuca J, Chiaravalloti ND. Information processing speed in multiple sclerosis: past, present, and future. Mult Scler. 2017;23(6):772–789. doi: 10.1177/1352458516645869. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Karabudak R, Dahdaleh M, Aljumah M, et al. Functional clinical outcomes in multiple sclerosis: current status and future prospects. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2015;4(3):192–201. doi: 10.1016/j.msard.2015.03.004. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Yozbatiran N, Baskurt F, Baskurt Z, Ozakbas S, Idiman E. Motor assessment of upper extremity function and its relation with fatigue, cognitive function and quality of life in multiple sclerosis patients. J Neurol Sci. 2006;246(1-2):117–122. doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2006.02.018. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Dubuisson N, Bauer A, Buckley M, et al. Validation of an environmentally-friendly and affordable cardboard 9-Hole Peg Test. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2017;17:172–176. doi: 10.1016/j.msard.2017.08.002. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Leong DP, Teo KK, Rangarajan S, et al. Prognostic value of grip strength: findings from the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study. Lancet. 2015;386(9990):266–273. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)62000-6. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Chen CC, Kasven N, Karpatkin HI, Sylvester A. Hand strength and perceived manual ability among patients with multiple sclerosis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;88(6):794–797. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2007.03.010. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Severijns D, Lamers I, Kerkhofs L, Feys P. Hand grip fatigability in persons with multiple sclerosis according to hand dominance and disease progression. J Rehabil Med. 2015;47(2):154–160. doi: 10.2340/16501977-1897. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Schwid SR, Goodman AD, McDermott MP, Bever CF, Cook SD. Quantitative functional measures in MS: what is a reliable change? Neurology. 2002;58(8):1294–1296. doi: 10.1212/wnl.58.8.1294. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Rudick RA, Kappos L. Measuring disability in relapsing-remitting MS. Neurology. 2010;75(4):296–297. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e3181ecf815. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Krishnan V, Jaric S. Hand function in multiple sclerosis: force coordination in manipulation tasks. Clin Neurophysiol. 2008;119(10):2274–2281. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2008.06.011. doi: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Schwid SR, Thornton CA, Pandya S, et al. Quantitative assessment of motor fatigue and strength in MS. Neurology. 1999;53(4):743–750. doi: 10.1212/wnl.53.4.743. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Aristotelous P, Stefanakis M, Pantzaris M, Pattichis C, Hadjigeorgiou GM, Giannaki CD. Associations between functional capacity, isokinetic leg strength, sleep quality and cognitive function in multiple sclerosis patients: a cross-sectional study. Postgrad Med. 2019;131(7):453–460. doi: 10.1080/00325481.2019.1662271. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Rao SM, Leo GJ, Bernardin L, Unverzagt F. Cognitive dysfunction in multiple sclerosis. I. Frequency, patterns, and prediction. Neurology. 1991;41(5):685–691. doi: 10.1212/wnl.41.5.685. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Baquet L, Hasselmann H, Patra S, et al. Short-term interval aerobic exercise training does not improve memory functioning in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis-a randomized controlled trial. PeerJ. 2018;6:e6037. doi: 10.7717/peerj.6037. doi: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Zimmer P, Bloch W, Schenk A, et al. High-intensity interval exercise improves cognitive performance and reduces matrix metalloproteinases-2 serum levels in persons with multiple sclerosis: a randomized controlled trial. Mult Scler. 2018;24(12):1635–1644. doi: 10.1177/1352458517728342. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Göksel Karatepe A, Kaya T, Günaydn R, Demirhan A, Ce P, Gedizlioğlu M. Quality of life in patients with multiple sclerosis: the impact of depression, fatigue, and disability. Int J Rehabil Res. 2011;34(4):290–298. doi: 10.1097/MRR.0b013e32834ad479. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Nourbakhsh B, Julian L, Waubant E. Fatigue and depression predict quality of life in patients with early multiple sclerosis: a longitudinal study. Eur J Neurol. 2016;23(9):1482–1486. doi: 10.1111/ene.13102. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Langdon DW. Cognition in multiple sclerosis. Curr Opin Neurol. 2011;24(3):244–249. doi: 10.1097/WCO.0b013e328346a43b. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from International Journal of MS Care are provided here courtesy of The Consortium of Multiple Sclerosis Centers

RESOURCES