Value of Mobility in Multiple Sclerosis
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Evaluating the importance of mobility and body functions in people with Multiple Sclerosis
IRAS ID
362346
Contact name
Ellen Buckley
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
School of Medicine and Population Health, The University of Sheffield
Duration of Study in the UK
2 years, 0 months, days
Research summary
People with MS (pwMS) have differing opinions on what they consider their most important bodily functions, although mobility is considered one of the highest priorities for patients and physicians. Various performance-based, clinician-reported and patient-reported outcomes to measure mobility exist and there is growing evidence for the use of digital mobility assessment for evaluation of real-world walking. However, there is limited evidence of people’s priorities regarding specific aspects of mobility-related disability.
Real-world mobility performance can be described in various ways but how different aspects of walking reflect the lived experience of mobility disability for people with Multiple Sclerosis overall and on an individual level is still unknown. For example, being able to walk for longer periods may enable walking for exercise or being able to vary walking over short bursts allowing adaptation to the environment. Furthermore, people may value their safety while walking more or less than how fast they can walk while engaging with activities of daily life.
Findings from this quantitative evaluation will contribute to and complement other ongoing efforts in the development of clinically meaningful digital mobility assessment tools. Such an approach could enable a valuable means of self-monitoring, personalised treatments and establishment of value-based healthcare systems by clarifying priorities for treatment and care systems for people with MS.
Here we will recruit a cohort of diagnosis with a range of symptom burden and physical disability and ask them to rank different aspects of walking from most important to least important at two time points 12 weeks apart. Further clinical detail will be gathered from electronic patient records and patient reported outcomes to provide contextual information about participant’s symptom burden. This will enable evaluation of retest reliability of responses to the ranking and exploration of cohort and individual associations between symptom and walking priorities.REC name
North West - Greater Manchester Central Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
25/NW/0284
Date of REC Opinion
29 Sep 2025
REC opinion
Further Information Favourable Opinion