| Name of the Instrument/Tool | Bristol Rheumatoid Arthritis Fatigue: BRAF Multidimensional Questionnaire (MDQ) |
| First Description |
Nicklin J, Cramp F, Kirwan J, Greenwood R, Urban M, Hewlett S. Measuring fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis: A cross‐sectional study to evaluate the bristol rheumatoid arthritis fatigue multi‐dimensional questionnaire, visual analog scales, and numerical rating scales. Arthritis Care & Research. 2010;62(11):1559-68 |
| Year | 2010 |
| Domains | |
| Concept of constructs | Fatigue |
| Population/Disease | Disease specific |
| Originally developed for | Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) |
| Other rheumatic diseases where can be applied (only if validated) |
--- |
| Additional population with no rheumatic diseases |
No |
| Language: Originally published in | English |
| Available in Language | Italian, German, Chinese, Swedish, Czech, English, Romanian, Polish, Korean, Turkish, Portuguese, Dutch, Spanish, Greek, Russian, Hungarian, French, Danish, Bulgarian |
| REFERENCE IDENTIFICATION | |
| Author/s | Nicklin J, Cramp F, Kirwan J, Greenwood R, Urban M, Hewlett S |
| Title | Measuring fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis: a cross-sectional study to evaluate the Bristol Rheumatoid Arthritis Fatigue Multi-Dimensional questionnaire, visual analog scales, and numerical rating scales |
| Journal | Arthritis Care & Research 2010 |
| Year | 2010 |
| Vol | 32 |
| Num | 11 |
| Pages | 1559-68 |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Language | English |
| Other references of interest | |
| Link | http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23838026 |
| Brief Description |
Dures EK, Hewlett SE, Cramp FA, Greenwood R, Nicklin JK, Urban M, Kirwan JR. Reliability and sensitivity to change of the Bristol Rheumatoid Arthritis Fatigue scales. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2013 Oct;52(10):1832-9 |
| Link | http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22325841 |
| Brief Description |
Nikolaus S, Bode C, Taal E, van der Laar MA.Expert evaluations of fatigue questionnaires used in rheumatoid arthritis: a Delphi study among patients, nurses and rheumatologists in the Netherlands. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2012 Jan-Feb;30(1):79-84 |
| Link | http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25593225 |
| Brief Description |
Oude Voshaar MA, Ten Klooster PM, Bode C, Vonkeman HE, Glas CA, Jansen T. Assessment of Fatigue in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Psychometric Comparison of Single-item, Multiitem, and Multidimensional Measures. J Rheumatol. 2015 Mar;42(3):413-20 |
| Instrument/Tool Translations References | |
| Link | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33091265/ |
| Brief Description |
Measures of Fatigue in Patients With Rheumatic Diseases |
| DEVELOPER CONTACT INFORMATION | |
| Correspondence to | Sarah Hewlett |
| Sarah.Hewlett@uwe.ac.uk | |
| Address | Sarah Hewlett, Academic Rheumatology, Bristol Royal Infirmary, Bristol BS2 8HW, UK |
| Website | http://hls.uwe.ac.uk/research/Default.aspx?pageid_312 |
| Available | --- |
| Links | --- |
| DESCRIPTION OF THE INSTRUMENT | |
| Type Of Measure | Composite Index, Questionnaire |
| Brief Description |
The BRAF MDQ was developed to assess the overall experience and impact of RA fatigue, and its different dimensions. It covers domains of physical fatigue, living with fatigue, cognitive fatigue, and emotional fatigue. Among the twenty items that provide a total fatigue score, it includes four subscale scores for physical fatigue (four items), living with fatigue (seven items), cognitive fatigue (five items), and emotional fatigue (four items) |
| Number of Items | 20 |
| Range | 0-70 |
| Responses options/scale |
Yes There are four options (not at all, a little, quite a lot, and a lot), except in the first three elements, which are numerical or categorical as appropriate |
| Developed for | Research, Clinical practice |
| PRACTICAL APPLICATION | |
| Method of administration | Self-administered |
| Recommendations to score |
Items scored 0–3, except for items 1 (scored 0–10), 2 (scored 0–7), and 3 (scored 0–2). A total fatigue score is obtained by summing the 20 item scores. Subscale items are summed to produce scores for physical fatigue, living with fatigue, cognitive fatigue, and emotional fatigue |
| Score Interpretation | Higher scores reflect greater severity. Total fatigue score is 0–70; subscale scores are physical fatigue 0–22, living with fatigue 0–21, cognitive fatigue 0–15, and emotional fatigue 0–12 |
| Cut-off points | --- |
| Cut-off points applied to | --- |
| Smallest detectable change if described | --- |
| Smallest detectable change applied to | --- |
| Completion time by the patient | - minutes |
| Scoring time by the assessor | - minutes |
| Training to score | Not necessary |
| Strengths | Useful in clinical practice & research |
| Limitations | Complex scoring |
| OTHER COMMENTS | |
| Other Comments | --- |