Cited by 18Multiple Sclerosis Research StudiesPeripheral Neuropathies and DisordersClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills

The aetiology of acute neurological decline in multiple sclerosis: Experience from an open-access clinic

Tallantyre, Emma C, Causon, Emmie G, Harding, Katharine E, Pickersgill, Trevor P, Robertson, Neil P·2015·Multiple Sclerosis Journal

Abstract

Background: Multiple sclerosis (MS) relapses contribute to disability and influence treatment decisions. Many centres now provide open access to specialist services for patients with new symptoms. However, there is scarce literature on the spectrum of presentations encountered in this setting. Objective: The objective of this paper is to characterise presentations to an open, rapid-access MS relapse clinic and the impact on disease management. Methods: A retrospective review of outpatient episodes over a three-year period was conducted. Demographic and service data, symptoms, disability, diagnosis and management were recorded according to a standardised proforma. Results: A total of 371 attendances were analysed. A new MS relapse was diagnosed in 216 (58%) episodes, of which 56 (26%) patients had an additional diagnosis which had also contributed to their presentation. Of 266 reports of non-relapse-related symptoms, 73 were unrelated to MS. Treatment interventions were made in almost all relapsing patients and in 70% of patients presenting with acute, non-relapse-related symptoms of MS. Changes to disease-modifying therapies were considered in 28% of consultations. Conclusion: Diagnosing MS relapses is crucial for disease management and yet remains challenging. Clinicians should be aware of differential diagnoses and confounding factors. The high incidence of therapeutic interventions observed suggests that rapid-access clinics represent an effective platform for responsive disease management.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1352458514538333

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tallantyre, E. C., Causon, E. G., Harding, K. E., Pickersgill, T. P., & Robertson, N. P.
Affiliations
  • University Hospital of Wales (GB)
  • Cardiff University (GB)
Venue
Multiple Sclerosis Journal
Published
2014-06-18
Volume
21
Issue
1
Pages
67-75
ISSN
  • 1352-4585 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-0970
OpenAlex
W2096317795
Cited by
18
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 1
FWCI
0.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Multiple Sclerosis Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Medical Research Council (MR/L010305/1)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Multiple Sclerosis Research Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Peripheral Neuropathies and Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
Keywords
multiple sclerosis, relapse, rapid access clinic, relapse diagnosis, differential diagnosis, disease-modifying therapy, disability, disease management
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Multiple Sclerosis, Recurrence, Severity of Illness Index, Disease Progression

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review