Skip to main content
Journal of Clinical Neurology (Seoul, Korea) logoLink to Journal of Clinical Neurology (Seoul, Korea)
. 2020 Sep 25;16(4):633–645. doi: 10.3988/jcn.2020.16.4.633

Validation Study of the Official Korean Version of the Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale

Jinse Park a, Seong-Beom Koh b, Kyum-Yil Kwon c, Sang Jin Kim d, Jae Woo Kim e, Joong-Seok Kim f, Kun-Woo Park g, Jong Sam Paik h, Young H Sohn i, Jin-Young Ahn j, Eungseok Oh k, Jinyoung Youn l, Ji-Young Lee m, Phil Hyu Lee i, Wooyoung Jang n, Han-Joon Kim o, Beom Seok Jeon o, Sun Ju Chung p, Jin Whan Cho l, Sang-Myung Cheon e, Suk Yun Kang q, Mee Young Park r, Seongho Park a, Young Eun Huh s, Seok Jae Kang t, Hee-Tae Kim t,
PMCID: PMC7541990  PMID: 33029970

Abstract

Background and Purpose

The Movement Disorder Society-Sponsored Revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) is widely used for estimating the symptoms of Parkinson's disease. Translation and validation of the MDS-UPDRS is necessary for non-English speaking countries and regions. The aim of this study was to validate the Korean version of the MDS-UPDRS.

Methods

Altogether, 362 patients in 19 centers were recruited for this study. We translated the MDS-UPDRS to Korean using the translation-back translation method and cognitive pretesting. We performed both confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses to validate the scale. We calculated the comparative fit index (CFI) for confirmatory factor analysis, and used unweighted least squares for exploratory factor analysis.

Results

The CFI was higher than 0.90 for all parts of the scale. Exploratory factor analysis also showed that the Korean MDS-UPDRS has the same number of factors in each part as the English version.

Conclusions

The Korean MDS-UPDRS has the same overall structure as the English MDS-UPDRS. Our translated scale can be designated as the official Korean MDS-UPDRS.

Keywords: Parkinson's diease, Movement Disorder Society Sponsored Revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale, validation, rating scale

INTRODUCTION

Parkinson's disease (PD) is characterized by various motor and nonmotor symptoms and is the second most common neurodegenerative disease. Estimating the severity of PD is challenging due to the heterogenic nature of its clinical presentation, which includes motor and nonmotor symptoms as well as motor complications. PD severity could only be assessed in interviews and using a clinical scale to evaluate the abilities to perform simple tasks. The Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) was introduced in the 1980s and has become the most commonly used clinical scale for estimating the motor and nonmotor symptoms of PD patients.1 In 2001, a taskforce sponsored by the Movement Disorder Society (MDS) highlighted some limitations and strengths of the UPDRS.2 A new version of the UPDRS was proposed, with the revised scale called the Movement Disorder Society Sponsored Revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS).3 The MDS-UPDRS includes the strengths of the UPDRS and improves its many drawbacks, and shows acceptable validity and reliability.4 The MDS-UPDRS is currently the official clinical scale used to analyze symptoms of PD, and it has been widely used in research and clinical settings.

The MDS-UPDRS comprises four parts. Part I (nonmotor aspects of experiences of daily living) and part II (motor aspects of experiences of daily living) comprise questionnaires that should be completed by patients or caregivers, and so it is crucial that simple and common expressions are used in parts I and II to obtain accurate information. The use of easily understood expressions in part III (motor examination) and part IV (motor complications) of the MDS-UPDRS is also important for translation and validation purposes. These parts are used by general clinicians and movement experts for clinical and research purposes.

The MDS-UPDRS has been translated and validated in many countries after considering language and culture differences, including into language version for Italian, Chinese, Dutch, German, French, Hebrew, Japanese, and Korean. The Italian, Hebrew, and Japanese versions of the MDS-UPDRS have demonstrated validity and reliability.5,6,7

The prevalence of PD among the older population above 60 years is 1.4% in Korea, and this is increasing more rapidly than the crude prevalence rate.8 Public awareness of the roles of age and education level in the prevalence of PD in Korea is also increasing, and the demand for using the MDS-UPDRS is expected to increase.9 The present study aimed to validate the Korean version of the MDS-UPDRS using factor analyses.

METHODS

Study design

This validation style had an observational, cross-sectional design. Translation of the MDS-UPDRS into Korean was performed in three stages: 1) translation and back-translation, 2) cognitive pretesting, and 3) large-scale validation testing. Stages 1 and 2 were performed by a task force comprising the Korean Movement Disorder Society in collaboration with the MDS. For stage 3, we enrolled 362 native-Korean-speaking PD patients selected from 17 centers in Korea to perform both confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) for the validation. We also evaluated the internal consistency to determine the reliability of the scale using Cronbach's alpha coefficient. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at each center, and all participants provided written informed consent (IRB no.: HY 2014-02-002-008).

Stage 1: translation protocol

We translated the original MDS-UPDRS into Korean using the translation–back-translation method. The two teams that independently performed translation and back-translation consisted of members of the Korean Movement Disorder Society. All members of the teams were experts in movement disorders, and at least one investigator on each team was fluent in English. The translation team first translated the original MDS-UPDRS into Korean, and then the back-translation team retranslated the Korean MDS-UPDRS into English. These translation and retranslation processes were performed blindly. After finishing the translation–retranslation processes, the teams compared the Korean MDS-UPDRS with the original English version and corrected mismatches.

Stage 2: cognitive pretesting

Cognitive pretesting is a qualitative approach to assessing instrument usability (or ease of completion) in terms of task difficulty for both the examiner and respondent. This pretesting method also assesses the interest, attention span, discomfort, and comprehension of the respondents.10 Ten PD patients and three raters were interviewed, and a scale from 1 point to 6 points was used to rate the difficulty during cognitive pretesting. When differences were observed between the back-translated Korean version and the original English version of the MDS-UPDRS, items and questions that were identified as potentially difficult in the cognitive-testing section of the English version were selected for cognitive pretesting. Topics included in the cognitive pretesting were cognitive impairment, anxiety, features of dopamine dysregulation syndrome, handwriting, freezing, hand movements, rising from a chair, postural stability, time spent with dyskinesia, and functional impact of dyskinesia.

Based on the results of the initial cognitive pretesting, additional rounds of translation, back-translation, and cognitive pretesting were required for the selected items. The final translation was considered to have been achieved when cognitive pretesting was completed and no problems were noted. After pretesting, the all translators collaborated to correct it and adapt it to Korean culture.

Stage 3: factor analyses and large-scale validation testing

This study applied both CFA and EFA, with the analyses performed using M-plus software (version 7). The unweighted least-squares (ULS) approach was used to estimate the minimum sum of the squared differences between the observed and estimated correlation matrices. We interpreted these factors used orthogonal Crawford-Ferguson (CF) varimax rotation, which restricts the uncorrelated factors. The sample size for the translation study was determined based on five subjects per item of the questionnaire being needed to perform the statistical analyses. Because the MDS-UPDRS contains 65 items, a sample of at least 325 participants was required. This study had a nationwide multicenter design, and so based on an estimated maximum dropout rate of 20%, 390 was set as the target sample size.

Any participant with missing values for any part of the MDS-UPDRS was excluded from the analysis of only that part, which meant that the sample size could vary between different parts of the scale. The investigators obtained approval from all participants to collect their data. Anonymized data that did not include patient names or medical record numbers were transferred to the analysis team via a secure website.

Primary analysis

The primary analysis of the Korean MDS-UPDRS data was performed using a CFA to determine if the factor structure for the English MDS-UPDRS could be confirmed based on the data collected using the Korean translation. This was the primary interest. The CFA was conducted separately for parts I and IV of the MDS-UPDRS, with the Korean data limited to factors defined by the English-language data. We evaluated the CFA results using the comparative fit index (CFI). According to the protocol, to establish a successful translated version and to designate that as the official translated version of the MDS-UPDRS, the CFI values for parts I to IV of the translated MDS-UPDRS were required to be at least 0.90 when compared with the English version. We also investigated the root-mean-square error approximation (RMSEA) for the CFA. The mean and variance-adjusted weighted least-squares (WLSMV) estimator was used to confirm the model fit.

Secondary analysis

Secondary analysis We conducted an EFA of the Korean version of the MDS-UPDRS (parts I–IV) to explore the underlying factor structure without the limitation of a prespecified factor structure. We produced a scree plot of the English version and used information from it to choose the number of factors to retain for each part of the MDS-UPDRS. The subjective scree test uses a scatter plot of eigenvalues versus their ranks with regard to magnitude to extract as many factors as there are eigenvalues that decrease before the last large decrease like elbow shape occurs in the plot. An item was retained for a chosen factor if the factor loading for that item was at least 0.40. The interpretation of the factors was assisted by using an orthogonal CF varimax rotation, which sets the factors to be uncorrelated.

The ULS estimator is the default used for factor analysis in M-plus. When the ULS estimator converges, it yields more accurate parameter estimates and standard errors than when using the WLSMV estimator. However, the convergence rate is generally better for the WLSMV than the ULS estimator.11 If convergence does not occur, it is suggested that the maximum likelihood (ML) should be used because this method may converge when the ULS estimator does not. The ULS algorithm did converge in the present study, but this was to an incorrect value (i.e., it explained more than 100% of the variance), and so the ML was used.

RESULTS

Cognitive pretesting

Ten PD patients and three raters were interviewed using the structured interview format that is typical used for cognitive pretesting. Cognitive pretesting produced acceptable results for most of the scale items. The overall cognitive pretesting score for all items was 5.5±1.3 (mean±standard deviation). However, two items had relatively low scores: dopamine dysregulation (4.7±1.1) and postural stability (5.1±0.3). The feedback from the responders indicated that the dopamine regulation item had problems with privacy infringement, while the postural stability item had problems caused by long sentences. After these two items were modified to make them easier to understand, no items were identified as problematic during the second round of testing.

The modified version of the scale was approved by the MDS as the Official Working Draft of the Korean MDS-UPDRS that was administered to a larger group of PD patients for further testing. After cognitive pretesting, this translated Korean MDS-UPDRS was posted on the official MDS homepage and shared before large-scale validation was performed.

The Korean data set contained information obtained from 390 native Korean-speaking PD patients who were examined using the MDS-UPDRS. The data from 28 of these 390 participants were excluded due to incorrect or missing information, and so finally 362 PD patients were enrolled.

The demographic information of the participants (all of whom were Korean) is presented in Table 1. Table 2 presents the distributions of item responses provided by the Korean-speaking and English-speaking groups.

Table 1. Demographic data of the study participants.

Korean (n=362) English (n=876) p
Sex, male/female 150/212 554/322 <0.01*
Age, years 68.3±9.5 67.5±10.9 8.15
Disease duration, years 6.1±4.0 8.3±6.7 5.10
Education level, years 8.12±4.82
Hoehn and Yahr stage 2.23±8.99
MDS-UPDRS part III score 25.67±15.35

Data are n or mean±standard-deviation values.

*Chi-squred test.

MDS-UPDRS: Movement Disorder Society Sponsored Revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale.

Table 2. Distributions of responses to the MDS-UPDRS according to language.

English Korean English Korean
n % n % n % n %
Part I
 Cognitive impairment  Daytime sleepiness
  0 428 48.86 159 43.9   0 212 24.20 177 48.9
  1 256 29.22 129 35.6   1 216 24.66 96 26.5
  2 121 13.81 48 13.3   2 364 41.55 70 19.3
  3 53 6.05 23 6.4   3 59 6.74 15 4.1
  4 17 1.94 2 0.6   4 16 1.83 4 1.1
  999 1 0.11 1 0.3   999 9 1.03 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Hallucinations and psychosis  Pain and other sensations
  0 687 78.42 291 80.4   0 303 34.59 170 47.0
  1 89 10.16 42 11.6   1 289 32.99 109 30.1
  2 51 5.82 19 5.3   2 130 14.84 59 16.3
  3 35 4.00 8 2.2   3 106 12.10 24 6.6
  4 13 1.48 2 0.6   4 39 4.45 0 0.0
  999 1 0.11 0 0.0   999 9 1.03 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Depressed mood  Urinary problems
  0 471 53.77 182 50.3   0 325 37.10 150 41.4
  1 265 30.25 123 34.0   1 281 32.08 114 31.5
  2 81 9.25 38 10.5   2 137 15.64 75 20.7
  3 45 5.14 18 5.0   3 88 10.05 19 5.3
  4 12 1.37 0 0.0   4 38 4.34 3 0.8
  999 2 0.23 1 0.3   999 7 0.80 1 0.3
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Anxious mood  Constipation problems
  0 413 47.15 183 50.6   0 362 43.84 128 35.4
  1 307 35.05 123 34.0   1 287 32.76 111 30.7
  2 96 10.96 43 11.9   2 119 13.58 75 20.7
  3 41 4.68 12 3.3   3 70 7.99 46 12.7
  4 17 1.94 1 0.3   4 9 1.03 2 0.6
  999 2 0.23 0 0.0   999 7 0.80 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Apathy  Light headedness on standing
  0 584 66.67 240 66.3   0 490 55.94 198 54.7
  1 141 16.10 67 18.5   1 216 24.66 107 29.6
  2 88 10.05 36 9.9   2 103 11.76 48 13.3
  3 52 5.94 18 5.0   3 51 5.82 9 2.5
  4 8 0.91 0 0.0   4 9 1.03 0 0.0
  999 3 0.34 1 0.3   999 7 0.80 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Features of dopamine dysregulation syndrome  Fatigue
  0 747 85.27 317 87.6   0 217 24.77 125 34.5
  1 57 6.51 19 5.3   1 335 38.24 121 33.4
  2 44 5.02 14 3.9   2 184 21.00 75 20.7
  3 19 2.17 11 3.0   3 81 9.25 35 9.7
  4 6 0.68 0 0.0   4 50 5.71 5 1.4
  999 3 0.34 1 0.3   999 9 1.03 1 0.3
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Sleep problems
  0 280 31.96 141 39.0
  1 202 23.06 93 25.7
  2 207 23.63 88 24.3
  3 140 15.98 38 10.5
  4 40 4.57 1 0.3
  999 7 0.80 1 0.3
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
Part II
 Speech  Doing hobbies and other
  0 252 28.77 151 41.7   0 227 25.91 141 39.0
  1 236 26.94 126 34.8   1 289 32.99 99 27.4
  2 233 26.60 55 15.2   2 185 21.12 59 16.3
  3 126 14.38 30 8.3   3 81 9.25 43 11.9
  4 22 2.51 0 0.0   4 84 9.59 20 5.5
  999 7 0.80 0 0.0   999 10 1.14 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Saliva and drooling  Turning in bed
  0 341 38.93 177 48.9   0 277 31.62 181 50.0
  1 115 13.13 94 26.0   1 378 43.15 116 32.0
  2 203 23.17 62 17.1   2 111 12.67 40 11.1
  3 157 17.92 25 6.9   3 55 6.28 20 5.5
  4 53 6.05 4 1.1   4 50 5.71 5 1.4
  999 7 0.80 0 0.0   999 5 0.57 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Chewing and swallowing  Tremor
  0 549 62.67 255 70.4   0 189 21.58 114 31.5
  1 230 26.26 81 22.4   1 360 41.10 157 43.4
  2 54 6.16 24 6.6   2 212 24.20 62 17.1
  3 34 3.88 2 0.6   3 72 8.22 18 5.0
  4 3 0.34 0 0.0   4 36 4.11 10 2.8
  999 6 0.68 0 0.0   999 7 0.80 1 0.3
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 100.00 362 100.0
 Eating tasks  Getting out of bed
  0 363 41.44 184 50.8   0 180 20.55 142 39.2
  1 265 30.25 122 33.7   1 317 36.19 120 33.2
  2 187 21.35 44 12.2   2 199 22.72 66 18.2
  3 42 4.79 12 3.3   3 104 11.87 28 7.7
  4 10 1.14 0 0.0   4 70 7.99 5 1.4
  999 9 1.03 0 0.0   999 6 0.68 1 0.3
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Dressing  Walking and balance
  0 220 25.11 151 41.7   0 184 21.00 123 34.0
  1 322 36.76 149 41.2   1 336 38.36 147 40.6
  2 211 24.09 40 11.1   2 105 11.99 58 16.0
  3 76 8.68 21 5.8   3 172 19.63 24 6.6
  4 42 4.79 0 0.0   4 74 8.45 10 2.8
  999 5 0.57 1 0.3   999 5 0.57 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Hygiene  Freezing
  0 342 39.04 184 50.8   0 453 51.71 236 65.2
  1 367 41.89 117 32.3   1 182 20.78 72 19.9
  2 88 10.05 46 12.7   2 89 10.16 37 10.2
  3 33 3.77 14 3.9   3 90 10.27 10 2.8
  4 38 4.34 1 0.3   4 56 6.39 7 1.9
  999 8 0.91 0 0.0   999 6 0.68 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Handwriting
  0 161 18.38 101 27.9
  1 251 28.65 172 47.5
  2 222 25.34 66 18.2
  3 146 16.67 18 5.0
  4 87 9.93 5 1.4
  999 9 1.03 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
Part III
 Speech  Rising from a chair
  0 189 21.58 111 30.7   0 422 48.17 220 60.8
  1 379 43.26 180 49.7   1 245 27.97 94 26.0
  2 213 24.32 67 18.5   2 78 8.90 28 7.7
  3 69 7.88 4 1.1   3 71 8.11 10 2.8
  4 22 2.51 0 0.0   4 55 6.28 10 2.8
  999 4 0.46 0 0.0   999 5 0.57 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Facial expression  Gait
  0 96 10.96 60 16.6   0 202 23.06 94 26.0
  1 300 34.25 192 53.0   1 351 40.07 178 49.2
  2 361 41.21 90 24.9   2 167 19.06 59 16.3
  3 89 10.16 19 5.3   3 97 11.07 21 5.8
  4 26 2.97 1 0.3   4 55 6.28 10 2.8
  999 4 0.46 0 0.0   999 4 0.46 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Rigidity: neck  Freezing of gait
  0 260 29.68 144 39.8   0 655 74.77 255 70.4
  1 247 28.20 151 41.7   1 95 10.84 65 18.0
  2 274 31.28 52 14.4   2 60 6.85 23 6.4
  3 73 8.33 14 3.9   3 26 2.97 12 3.3
  4 16 1.83 1 0.3   4 38 4.34 7 1.9
  999 6 0.68 0 0.0   999 2 0.23 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Rigidity: RUE  Postural stability
  0 176 20.09 100 27.6   0 422 48.17 201 55.5
  1 282 32.19 178 49.2   1 157 17.92 74 20.4
  2 342 39.04 76 21.0   2 60 6.85 40 11.1
  3 69 7.88 8 2.2   3 149 17.01 40 11.1
  4 6 0.68 0 0.0   4 86 9.82 7 1.9
  999 1 0.11 0 0.0   999 2 0.23 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Rigidity: LUE  Posture
  0 205 23.40 103 28.5   0 173 19.75 75 20.7
  1 268 30.59 182 50.3   1 337 38.47 174 48.1
  2 317 36.19 66 18.2   2 206 23.52 86 23.8
  3 77 8.79 9 2.5   3 125 14.27 18 5.0
  4 7 0.80 2 0.6   4 33 3.77 9 2.5
  999 2 0.23 0 0.0   999 2 0.23 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Rigidity: RLE  Global spontaneity of movement
  0 272 31.05 175 48.3   0 108 12.33 58 16.0
  1 248 28.31 146 40.3   1 278 31.74 172 47.5
  2 275 31.39 35 9.7   2 279 31.85 106 29.3
  3 67 7.65 6 1.7   3 184 21.00 17 4.7
  4 10 1.14 0 0.0   4 27 3.08 8 2.2
  999 4 0.46 0 0.0   999 0 0.00 1 0.3
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Rigidity: LLE  Postural tremor: right hand
  0 286 32.65 167 46.1   0 544 62.10 185 51.1
  1 227 25.91 146 40.3   1 262 29.91 146 40.3
  2 275 31.39 38 10.5   2 43 4.91 29 8.0
  3 75 8.56 9 2.5   3 23 2.63 2 0.6
  4 11 1.26 2 0.6   4 1 0.11 0 0.0
  999 2 0.23 0 0.0   999 3 0.34 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Finger tapping: right hand  Postural tremor: left hand
  0 122 13.93 81 22.4   0 518 59.13 174 48.1
  1 342 39.04 165 45.6   1 276 31.51 150 41.4
  2 252 28.77 83 22.9   2 49 5.59 30 8.3
  3 144 16.44 32 8.8   3 29 3.31 8 2.2
  4 15 1.71 0 0.0   4 1 0.11 0 0.0
  999 1 0.11 1 0.3   999 3 0.34 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Finger tapping: left hand  Kinetic tremor: right hand
  0 108 12.33 84 23.2   0 546 62.33 213 58.8
  1 298 34.02 134 37.0   1 265 30.25 127 35.1
  2 265 30.25 94 26.0   2 46 5.25 19 5.3
  3 181 20.66 46 12.7   3 13 1.48 2 0.6
  4 22 2.51 4 1.1   4 2 0.23 1 0.3
  999 2 0.23 0 0.0   999 4 0.46 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Hand movements: right hand  Kinetic tremor: left hand
  0 187 21.35 122 33.7   0 493 56.28 200 55.3
  1 346 39.50 169 46.7   1 293 33.45 133 36.7
  2 231 26.37 54 14.9   2 72 8.22 25 6.9
  3 98 11.19 16 4.4   3 14 1.60 3 0.8
  4 12 1.37 0 0.0   4 0 0.00 1 0.3
  999 2 0.23 1 0.3   999 4 0.46 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Hand movements: left hand  Rest tremor amplitude: RUE
  0 164 18.72 122 33.7   0 586 66.89 262 72.4
  1 311 35.50 143 39.5   1 112 12.79 71 19.6
  2 250 28.54 76 21.0   2 121 13.81 25 6.9
  3 125 14.27 16 4.4   3 53 6.05 4 1.1
  4 25 2.85 5 1.4   4 3 0.34 0 0.0
  999 1 0.11 0 0.0   999 1 0.11 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Pronation–supination movements: right hand  Rest tremor amplitude: LUE
  0 199 22.72 111 30.7   0 603 68.84 242 66.9
  1 335 38.24 185 51.1   1 120 13.70 69 19.1
  2 216 24.66 57 15.8   2 99 11.30 44 12.2
  3 107 12.21 9 2.5   3 45 5.14 7 1.9
  4 17 1.94 0 0.0   4 5 0.57 0 0.0
  999 2 0.23 0 0.0   999 4 0.46 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Pronation–supination movements: left hand  Rest tremor amplitude: RLE
  0 162 18.49 115 31.8   0 777 88.70 313 86.5
  1 297 33.90 145 40.1   1 52 5.94 37 10.2
  2 235 26.83 72 19.9   2 35 4.00 12 3.3
  3 150 17.12 30 8.3   3 9 1.03 0 0.0
  4 29 3.31 0 0.0   4 0 0.00 0 0.0
  999 3 0.34 0 0.0   999 3 0.34 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Toe tapping: right foot  Rest tremor amplitude: LLE
  0 168 19.18 145 40.1   0 795 90.75 309 85.4
  1 323 36.87 147 40.6   1 46 5.25 33 9.1
  2 228 26.03 64 17.7   2 20 2.28 17 4.7
  3 129 14.73 6 1.7   3 12 1.37 3 0.8
  4 27 3.08 0 0.0   4 0 0.00 0 0.0
  999 1 0.11 0 0.0   999 3 0.34 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Toe tapping: left foot  Rest tremor amplitude: lip/jaw
  0 154 17.58 138 38.1   0 780 89.04 318 87.9
  1 251 28.65 117 32.3   1 63 7.19 38 10.5
  2 268 30.59 85 23.5   2 18 2.05 6 1.7
  3 154 17.58 20 5.5   3 13 1.48 0 0.0
  4 46 5.25 2 0.6   4 1 0.11 0 0.0
  999 3 0.34 0 0.0   999 1 0.11 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Leg agility: right leg  Constancy of rest tremor
  0 250 28.54 187 51.7   0 409 46.69 174 48.1
  1 329 37.56 121 33.4   1 214 24.43 115 31.8
  2 190 21.69 48 13.3   2 91 10.39 50 13.8
  3 86 9.82 4 1.1   3 85 9.70 14 3.9
  4 18 2.05 2 0.6   4 67 7.65 9 2.5
  999 3 0.34 0 0.0   999 10 1.14 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Leg agility: left leg
  0 216 24.66 173 47.8
  1 298 34.02 121 33.4
  2 213 24.32 54 14.9
  3 106 12.10 11 3.0
  4 38 4.34 3 0.8
  999 5 0.57 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
Part IV
 Time spent with dyskinesia  Functional impact of fluctuations
  0 563 64.27 248 68.5   0 433 49.43 264 72.9
  1 173 19.75 53 14.6   1 165 18.84 35 9.7
  2 87 9.93 36 9.9   2 81 9.25 35 9.7
  3 27 3.08 18 5.0   3 119 13.58 22 6.1
  4 17 1.94 7 1.9   4 63 7.19 6 1.7
  999 9 1.03 0 0.0   999 15 1.71 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Functional impact of dyskinesia  Complexity of motor fluctuations
  0 695 79.34 274 75.7   0 404 46.12 238 65.8
  1 90 10.27 35 9.7   1 291 33.22 85 23.5
  2 29 3.31 26 7.2   2 69 7.88 34 9.4
  3 46 5.25 19 5.3   3 50 5.71 5 1.4
  4 5 0.57 8 2.2   4 46 5.25 0 0.0
  999 11 1.26 0 0.0   999 16 1.83 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0
 Time spent in the off state  Painful off-state dystonia
  0 383 43.72 235 64.9   0 680 77.63 309 85.4
  1 341 38.93 77 21.3   1 114 13.01 29 8.0
  2 106 12.10 38 10.5   2 45 5.14 16 4.4
  3 22 2.51 8 2.2   3 13 1.48 8 2.2
  4 14 1.60 4 1.1   4 15 1.71 0 0.0
  999 10 1.14 0 0.0   999 9 1.03 0 0.0
  Total 876 100.00 362 100.0   Total 876 100.00 362 100.0

LLE: left lower extremity, LUE: left upper extremity, MDS-UPDRS: Movement Disorder Society Sponsored Revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale, RLE: right lower extremity, RUE: right upper extremity.

Factor analysis

Confirmatory factor analysis

Table 3 lists the CFA models for each part of the MDS-UPDRS. The CFI values for all four parts of the Korean MDS-UPDRS in comparisons with the factor structure of the English version were at least 0.91. Since our prespecified criterion was a CFI of at least 0.90, we concluded that the prespecified factor structure of the English version of the MDS-UPDRS was confirmed in the Korean data set.

Table 3. Confirmatory factor analysis model fit.
Part I: nonmotor aspects of experiences of daily living (two-factor model)*
 Korean MDS-UPDRS  CFI=0.91, RMSEA=0.08 (356 patients)
 English MDS-UPDRS  CFI=0.96, RMSEA=0.06 (849 patients)
Part II: motor aspects of experiences of daily living (three-factor model)
 Korean MDS-UPDRS  CFI=0.96, RMSEA=0.14 (359 patients)
 English MDS-UPDRS  CFI=0.97, RMSEA=0.09 (851 patients)
Part III: motor examination (seven-factor model)
 Korean MDS-UPDRS  CFI=0.92, RMSEA=0.09 (360 patients)
 English MDS-UPDRS  CFI=0.95, RMSEA=0.07 (801 patients)
Part IV: motor complications (two-factor model)
 Korean MDS-UPDRS  CFI=0.99, RMSEA=0.11 (362 patients)
 English MDS-UPDRS  CFI=1.00, RMSEA=0.04 (848 patients)

*Dopamine dysregulation syndrome was not included in this analysis since it did not load onto any factor.

CFI: comparative fit index, MDS-UPDRS: Movement Disorder Society Sponsored Revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale, RMSEA: root-mean-square error approximation.

Exploratory factor analysis

Our EFA of the Korean data set differed from the EFA of the English-language data set in some areas (Fig. 1). From the scree plots, we extracted two factors for part I (nonmotor aspects of experiences of daily living) (Fig. 1A), three factors for part II (motor aspects of experiences of daily living) (Fig. 1B), seven factors for part III (motor examination) (Fig. 1C), and two factors for part IV (motor complications) (Fig. 1D).

Fig. 1. Scree plot of the Korean and English Movement Disorder Society Sponsored Revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale, from which two factors were extracted for part I (nonmotor aspects of experiences of daily living) (A), three factors for part II (motor aspects of experiences of daily living) (B), seven factors for part III (motor examination) (C), and two factors for part IV (motor complications) (D).

Fig. 1

The factor structure of part I was consistent with that of the English version of the MDS-UPDRS. In part II, “handwriting, doing hobbies, and other activities” loaded onto factor 2 but not factor 1; “tremor” did not load onto any of the factors; and “dressing and hygiene” loaded onto factor 2 but not factor 3. In part III, “rest tremor amplitude (lip/jaw)” did not load onto any of the factors, and nine items loaded onto multiple factors. For part IV, the factor structure was consistent with that of the English version of the MDS-UPDRS. We evaluated the internal consistency to determine reliability and obtained Cronbach's alpha coefficient for the MDS-UPDRS; this was 0.94, which indicated the presence of excellent internal consistency (Table 4).

Table 4. Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the four parts of the Korean MDS-UPDRS.
Cronbach's alpha coefficient Number of items
Part I 0.73 13
Part II 0.90 13
Part III 0.94 33
Part IV 0.88 6
Total 0.94 65

MDS-UPDRS: Movement Disorder Society Sponsored Revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale.

DISCUSSION

This study found that the translated Korean MDS-UPDRS shows acceptable validity in factor analyses. The CFA showed that all parts of the Korean MDS-UPDRS are consistent with all parts of the English MDS-UPDRS, while the EFA extracted the same number of factors from the Korean and English versions of the MDS-UPDRS. The MDS proposed a unified statistical method for translating the MDS-UPDRS into another language. Compared with previous reports of the MDS-UPDRS for other languages, the CFI values for all parts of the Korean MDS UPDRS exceeded 0.90, indicating significant consistency. The Korean MDS-UPDRS therefore shares a common structure with the English MDS-UPDRS.

This study was conducted at ten centers across Korea. Most of the participants were female, which is similar to previous studies involving Asian populations.12,13 This female predominance could be due to several confounding factors, including genetic susceptibility, environmental factors, and preventative factors.13

A few mismatches were detected during cognitive pretesting of the Korean translation of the MDS-UPDRS. Dopamine dysregulation syndrome is an unfamiliar term in Korean, with “dysregulation” in particularly not being commonly used in Korea. We therefore changed that term to a more natural expression during cognitive pretesting. Moreover, there is only a former term for postural stability in Korean, and so we rephrased it into a colloquial expression.

The distributions for the following items differed between the Korean and English versions of the MDS-UPDRS: daytime sleepiness, cognitive impairment, hallucination, and depressive mood in part I; turning in and getting out of bed, speech, dressing, handwriting, walking/balance, and freezing in part II; toe tapping, leg agility, and postural stability in part III; and complexity of motor fluctuations, time spent in the off state, time spent with dyskinesia, and functional impact of dyskinesia in part IV. The difference in the “turning in and getting out of bed” item may have been caused by cultural differences. Most Koreans sleep on a Korean-style mattress on the floor rather than on a bed , and so sleeping on a Korean-style mattress makes getting out of bed more difficult. The differences in other items may have been caused by language differences. The terms “tapping,” “agility,” “complexity,” “fluctuation,” “off state,” “postural stability,” and “dyskinesia” are more difficult to translate into Korean and are not easy to understand. Several items in part I, including cognitive impairment, hallucination, and depressive mood, are usually rated by caregivers rather than by the patients themselves. Caregivers can be easily affected by the medical environment or healthcare system in their own country. “Time spent with dyskinesia” and “time spent in the off state” are usually obtained from patients, which can cause an informative bias because many patients with PD have cognitive dysfunction during the motor-complications stage. It is particularly interesting that these differences were not similar to those of the Japanese validation study, which indicates that differences in culture and language between countries should always be considered when translating the MDS-UPDRS. However, the discrepancies did not affect the validation of the Korean MDS-UPDRS in the present study.

The good fitness of the model was indicated by the CFI values exceeding 0.90 for all parts of the Korean MDS-UPDRS. The RMSEA values for parts II and IV were relatively high, but we decided to use the CFI to evaluate statistical significance. Variability from sample to sample was expected during the EFA, and we identified isolated item differences in the factor structures of the Korean and English versions of the MDS-UPDRS. Several items had cross-loading for multiple factors in the Korean scale, which might have been due to inherent differences between the Korean and English languages as well as cultural differences. However, scree plots of the Korean version revealed that two, three, seven, and two factors in parts I, II, III, and IV, respectively, were similar to those for the English version (Fig. 1). Both the EFA and CFA demonstrated that the Korean and English versions of the MDS-UPDRS share a common structure. The Korean MDS-UPDRS is available at the official MDS webpage (https://www.movementdisorders.org/MDS/MDS-Rating-Scales/MDS-Unified-Parkinsons-Disease-Rating-Scale-MDS-UPDRS.htm).

The high CFI values (all >0.90) obtained in the CFA for all four parts of the Korean MDS-UPDRS indicate that the overall factor structure of the Korean version of the MDS-UPDRS is consistent with that of the English version. Moreover, the EFA also showed that the number of factors was the same in each part of the Korean and English versions. Cronbach's alpha coefficient indicated excellent internal consistency. However, future studies of the interrater and intrarater reliabilities are necessary. The version validated in the present study can be designated as the official Korean version of the MDS-UPDRS.

Acknowledgements

None.

Footnotes

Author Contributions:
  • Conceptualization: Hee-Tae Kim, Beom Seok Jeon.
  • Data curation: Seok Jae Kang, Seoung-Beom Koh, Kyum-Yil Kwon, Sang Jin Kim, Jae Woo Kim, Joong-Seok Kim, Kun-Woo Park, Jong Sam Paik, Young H. Sohn, Jin-Young Ahn, Eungseok Oh, Jinyoung Youn, Ji-Young Lee, Phil Hyu Lee, Wooyoung Jang, Han-Joon Kim, Sun Ju Chung, Jin Whan Cho, Sang-Myung Cheon, Suk Yun Kang, Mee Young Park, Seoungho Park, Young Eun Huh.
  • Formal analysis: Seok Jae Kang.
  • Investigation: Jinse Park.
  • Validation: Jinse Park.
  • Writing—original draft: Jinse Park.
  • Writing—review & editing: Hee-Tae Kim, Beom Seok Jeon, Seoung-Beom Koh, Kyum-Yil Kwon, Sang Jin Kim, Jae Woo Kim, Joong-Seok Kim, Kun-Woo Park, Jong Sam Paik, Young H. Sohn, Jin-Young Ahn, Eungseok Oh, Jinyoung Youn, Ji-Young Lee, Phil Hyu Lee, Wooyoung Jang, Han-Joon Kim, Sun Ju Chung, Jin Whan Cho, Sang-Myung Cheon, Suk Yun Kang, Mee Young Park, Seoungho Park, Young Eun Huh.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

References

  • 1.Ramaker C, Marinus J, Stiggelbout AM, Van Hilten BJ. Systematic evaluation of rating scales for impairment and disability in Parkinson's disease. Mov Disord. 2002;17:867–876. doi: 10.1002/mds.10248. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Movement Disorder Society Task Force on Rating Scales for Parkinson's Disease. The Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS): status and recommendations. Mov Disord. 2003;18:738–750. doi: 10.1002/mds.10473. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Goetz CG, Tilley BC, Shaftman SR, Stebbins GT, Fahn S, Martinez-Martin P, et al. Movement Disorder Society-sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS): scale presentation and clinimetric testing results. Mov Disord. 2008;23:2129–2170. doi: 10.1002/mds.22340. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Martinez-Martin P, Rodriguez-Blazquez C, Alvarez-Sanchez M, Arakaki T, Bergareche-Yarza A, Chade A, et al. Expanded and independent validation of the Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) J Neurol. 2013;260:228–236. doi: 10.1007/s00415-012-6624-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Antonini A, Abbruzzese G, Ferini-Strambi L, Tilley B, Huang J, Stebbins GT, et al. Validation of the Italian version of the Movement Disorder Society--Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale. Neurol Sci. 2013;34:683–687. doi: 10.1007/s10072-012-1112-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Zitser J, Peretz C, Ber David A, Shabtai H, Ezra A, Kestenbaum M, et al. Validation of the Hebrew version of the Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale. Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2017;45:7–12. doi: 10.1016/j.parkreldis.2017.09.012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Kashihara K, Kondo T, Mizuno Y, Kikuchi S, Kuno S, Hasegawa K, et al. Official Japanese Version of the Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale: validation against the original English version. Mov Disord Clin Pract. 2014;1:200–212. doi: 10.1002/mdc3.12058. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Seo WK, Koh SB, Kim BJ, Yu SW, Park MH, Park KW, et al. Prevalence of Parkinson's disease in Korea. J Clin Neurosci. 2007;14:1155–1157. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2006.09.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Youn J, Oh E, Park J, Park S, Kim JS, Jang W. Public awareness and knowledge about parkinson's disease: a national population based survey in South Korea. Neuroepidemiology. 2016;47:117–123. doi: 10.1159/000452500. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Tilley BC, LaPelle NR, Goetz CG, Stebbins GT MDS-UPDRS Task Force. Using cognitive pretesting in scale development for Parkinson's disease: the Movement Disorder Society Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) example. J Parkinsons Dis. 2014;4:395–404. doi: 10.3233/JPD-130310. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Forero CG, Maydeu-Olivares A, Gallardo-Pujol D. Factor analysis with ordinal indicators: a Monte Carlo study comparing DWLS and ULS estimation. Struct Equ Modeling. 2009;16:625–641. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Kimura H, Kurimura M, Wada M, Kawanami T, Kurita K, Suzuki Y, et al. Female preponderance of Parkinson's disease in Japan. Neuroepidemiology. 2002;21:292–296. doi: 10.1159/000065527. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Park JH, Kim DH, Kwon DY, Choi M, Kim S, Jung JH, et al. Trends in the incidence and prevalence of Parkinson's disease in Korea: a nationwide, population-based study. BMC Geriatr. 2019;19:320. doi: 10.1186/s12877-019-1332-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Clinical Neurology (Seoul, Korea) are provided here courtesy of Korean Neurological Association

RESOURCES