Development of a comprehensive assessment toolbox for stroke (original) (raw)
Related papers
Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases, 2005
Objective: Quantifying stroke severity is essential for interpreting outcomes in stroke studies; severity impacts outcomes. Because outcome studies often enroll patients some time after stroke and there is little standardization of the history and physical examination, objective measurement of stroke severity is limited. A method for retrospectively scoring the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) based on history and physical examination has been proposed, but has yet to be validated in patients with higher NIHSS score. We evaluate the validity of this scoring method across the spectrum of the NIHSS scores. Methods: The retrospective scoring algorithm was applied to history and physical examinations documented for 58 patients with ischemic stroke presenting to any of 17 regional acute care facilities who had a NIHSS score recorded by a stroke team physician. The retrospective NIHSS score was obtained by standardized chart review. Linear regression was used to estimate scale-dependent and scale-independent bias. Limits of agreement quantify deviation of the retrospective NIHSS score from the prospective NIHSS score. Results: Mean (SD) age at stroke was 66 (14) years; 27 (46.6%) patients were men, and 38 (65.5%) were white. The mean (SD) prospective NIHSS score was 13.6 (7.8); the mean (SD) retrospective NIHSS score was 13.7 (7.8). There were 23 (40%) prospective NIHSS scores above 15, and 13 scores (22%) above 20. The linear regression constant was 0.290 (95% confidence interval Ϫ0.107, 0.687); the slope was 0.987 (95% confidence interval 0.962, 1.013). The R 2 for the model was 0.991. Limits of agreement were Ϫ1.35 and 1.59. Conclusion: The retrospective NIHSS appears valid across the entire spectrum of scores.
Reliability and Validity of Estimating the NIH Stroke Scale Score from Medical Records
Stroke, 1999
Background and Purpose —The aim of our study was to determine whether the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) can be estimated retrospectively from medical records. The NIHSS is a quantitative measure of stroke-related neurological deficit with established reliability and validity for use in prospective clinical research. Recently, retrospective observational studies have estimated NIHSS scores from medical records for quantitative outcome analysis. The reliability and validity of estimation based on chart review has not been determined. Methods —Thirty-nine patients were selected because their NIHSS scores were formally measured at admission and discharge. Handwritten notes from medical records were abstracted and NIHSS scores were estimated by 6 raters who were blinded to the actual scores. Estimated scores were compared among raters and with the actual measured scores. Results —Interrater reliability was excellent, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.82...
Assessment scales in stroke: clinimetric and clinical considerations
Clinical Interventions in Aging, 2013
As stroke care has developed, there has been a need to robustly assess the efficacy of interventions both at the level of the individual stroke survivor and in the context of clinical trials. To describe stroke-survivor recovery meaningfully, more sophisticated measures are required than simple dichotomous end points, such as mortality or stroke recurrence. As stroke is an exemplar disabling long-term condition, measures of function are well suited as outcome assessment. In this review, we will describe functional assessment scales in stroke, concentrating on three of the more commonly used tools: the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, the modified Rankin Scale, and the Barthel Index. We will discuss the strengths, limitations, and application of these scales and use the scales to highlight important properties that are relevant to all assessment tools. We will frame much of this discussion in the context of "clinimetric" analysis. As they are increasingly used to inform stroke-survivor assessments, we will also discuss some of the commonly used quality-of-life measures. A recurring theme when considering functional assessment is that no tool suits all situations. Clinicians and researchers should chose their assessment tool based on the question of interest and the evidence base around clinimetric properties.
The Stroke Impact Scale version 2.0: evaluation of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change
Stroke, 1999
MethodsVersion 2.0 of the SIS is a self-report measure that includes 64 items and assesses 8 domains (strength, hand function, ADL/IADL, mobility, communication, emotion, memory and thinking, and participation). Subjects with mild and moderate strokes completed the SIS at ...
National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale
Stroke
Background and Purpose— The modified Rankin Scale (mRS) at 3 months is the most commonly used primary outcome measure in stroke treatment trials, but it lacks specificity and requires long-term follow-up interviews, which consume time and resources. An alternative may be the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), early after stroke. Our aim was to evaluate whether the NIHSS assessed within 1 week after treatment could serve as a primary outcome measure for trials of acute treatment for ischemic stroke. Methods— We used data from 2 randomized controlled trials of endovascular treatment for ischemic stroke: the positive MR CLEAN (Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands; N=500) and the neutral IMS (Interventional Management of Stroke) III trial (N=656). We used a causal mediation model, with linear and ordinal logistic regression adjusted for confounders, to evaluate the NIHSS 24 hours and 5 to 7 days aft...
Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 2008
Objective: To demonstrate how the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) can be used to create coded functional status indicators specific for stroke from a simple stroke-specific functional index, the Stroke Impact Scale-16 (SIS-16). Subjects: Nineteen professionals for the mapping portion and 8 persons with stroke for the cognitive debriefing portion. Methods: Participants were asked to identify appropriate codes for the corresponding items of the SIS-16 following a structured protocol for mapping measures to the ICF. A Delphi technique was used in order to reach consensus for as many items as possible. In addition, cognitive debriefing was conducted with persons with stroke. Results: A total of 13 items had Functional Status Indicators endorsed (8 items at the 4 digit level and 5 items at the 3 digit level). There were 3 items that did not reach consensus. The cognitive debriefing sessions demonstrated the differences in interpretation from the persons with stroke and the intentions by the developers. Conclusion: This study has shown how the ICF can capture most items from functional status measures, such as the SIS-16. Furthermore, the items can be used to map onto a standard coding framework, illustrating the potential for increased use of Functional Status Indicators.