Detailled Information

Name of the Instrument/Tool Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue (MAF)
First Description

Tack B. Tack B. Dimensions and correlates of fatigue in older adults with rheumatoid arthritis [dissertation]. San Francisco: University of California; 1991.

Year 1991
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)
Fibromyalgia (FM), Osteoarthritis (OA), Osteoporosis (OP), Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE)
Additional population with no rheumatic diseases Yes
other long-term conditions such as human immunodeficiency virus, multiple sclerosis, and cancer; healthy controls
Language: Originally published in English
Available in Language Croatian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, Finnish, French, German, Hungarian, Italian, Norwegian, Polish, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish, Swedish, Turkish
REFERENCE IDENTIFICATION
Author/s Tack B
Title Dimensions and correlates of fatigue in older adults with rheumatoid arthritis
Journal Dissertation; University of California; San Francisco
Year 1991
Vol ---
Num ---
Pages ---
Country United States of America
Language English
Other references of interest
Link http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7791155
Brief Description

Belza BL. Comparison of self-reported fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis and controls. J Rheumatol 1995;22:639–43 (first description published in a journal)

Link http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9179174
Brief Description

Neuberger GB, Press AN, Lindsley HB, Hinton R, Cagle PE, Carlson K, et al. Effects of exercise on fatigue, aerobic fitness, and disease activity measures in persons with rheumatoid arthritis. Res Nurs Health 1997;20:195–204.

Link http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15468350
Brief Description

Wolfe F. Fatigue assessments in rheumatoid arthritis: comparative performance of visual analog scales and longer fatigue questionnaires in 7,760 patients. J Rheumatol 2004;31:1896–902.

Instrument/Tool Translations References
Link http://www.mapi-research.fr
Brief Description

To gain access to and information about a translated version MAPI Research Institut may be contacted  at their website at http://www.mapi-research.fr

DEVELOPER CONTACT INFORMATION
Correspondence to Basia Belza
E-Mail basiab@uw.edu
Address Department of Biobehavorial Nursing and Health Systems, Box 357266, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195-7266
Website http://apps.nursing.uw.edu/maf/index.htm
Available There is no charge for individual use of the MAF. Colleagues in industry who would like to use the MAF may be charged a nominal fee. The MAF is copyrighted by Basia Belza.
Links ---
DESCRIPTION OF THE INSTRUMENT
Type Of Measure Composite Index, Questionnaire, Scale
Brief Description

The MAF was originally developed in 1991 to measure multiple dimensions of fatigue in adults with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and revised in 1995 by changing the visual analogue scales (VAS) with numerical rating scales (NRS). The MAF is a revision of the Piper Fatigue Scale, a 41-item measure of fatigue developed for research purposes and tested with oncology patients (Piper, Lindsey, Paul, & Weller, 1989).

The MAF covers 4 dimensions of fatigue: severity, distress, interference in activities of daily living (doing chores, cooking, bathing, dressing, working, visiting, sexual activity, leisure, shopping, walking and exercising), and frequency and change during the previous week.

Number of Items 16
Range 0-50
Responses options/scale Yes
Numerical rating scale (1 - 10) for items 1, and 4 - 14 ( 1 = not at all, 10 = a great deal), item 2 (1 = mild to 10 = severe), item 3 ( 1 = no distress, 10 = a great deal of distress). Categorical responses (1 - 4) for Timing items 15 and 16.
Developed for Not specified
PRACTICAL APPLICATION
Method of administration Self-administered
Recommendations to score

The first 15 items provide a global score, Global Fatigue Index (GFI). The 16th question (“To what degree has your fatigue changed during the past week?”) does not contribute to the GFI.

If the respondent indicates “No fatigue at all” for item 1, all remaining items should be scored as 0. Items 1–3 are summed, items 4–14 are averaged but should not be scored where the respondent indicates that they do not do an activity “For reasons other than fatigue,” and item 15 is transformed into a 0–10 scale by multiplying the score by 2.5. The GFI is then calculated by adding these 3 components (sum of items 1–3, average of items 4–14, and transformed item 15). Item 16 (change) does not contribute to the GFI, and is scored 1–4.

Score Interpretation A higher score indicates more severe fatigue, fatigue distress, or impact on activities of daily living.
Cut-off points ---
Cut-off points applied to ---
Smallest detectable change if described ---
Smallest detectable change applied to ---
Completion time by the patient 0 minutes
Scoring time by the assessor 0 minutes
Training to score Not necessary
Strengths Useful in clinical practice & research
Limitations Copyrighted
OTHER COMMENTS
Other Comments ---