This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Wilson, J.T. L. Articles by Bone, I. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Wilson, J.T. L. Articles by Bone, I. Related Collections Health policy and outcome research Behavioral/psychosocial - stroke Behavioral Changes and Stroke

(Stroke. 2002;33:2243.)
© 2002 American Heart Association, Inc.

Original Contributions

Improving the Assessment of Outcomes in Stroke

Use of a Structured Interview to Assign Grades on the Modified Rankin Scale

J.T. Lindsay Wilson, PhD; Asha Hareendran, PhD; Marie Grant, BSc; Tracey Baird, MD; Ursula G.R. Schulz, MD; Keith W. Muir, MD Ian Bone, MD

From the Department of Psychology, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK (J.T.L.W., M.G.); Outcomes Research, Pfizer Ltd, Sandwich, UK (A.H.); and Department of Neurology, Institute of Neurological Sciences, Glasgow, UK (T.B., U.G.R.S., K.W.M., I.B.).

Correspondence to J.T.L. Wilson, Department of Psychology, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, UK. E-mail J.T.L.Wilson{at}stir.ac.uk

Background and Purpose— The modified Rankin Scale is widely used to assess changes in activity and lifestyle after stroke, but it has been criticized for its subjectivity. The purpose of the present study was to compare conventional assessment on the modified Rankin Scale with assessment through a structured interview.

Methods— Sixty-three patients with stroke 6 to 24 months previously were interviewed and graded independently on the modified Rankin Scale by 2 observers. These observers then underwent training in use of a structured interview for the scale that covered 5 areas of everyday function. Eight weeks after the first assessment, the same observers reassessed 58 of these patients using the structured interview.

Results— Interrater reliability was measured with the statistic (weighted with quadratic weights). For the scale applied conventionally, overall agreement between the 2 raters was 57% (_w=0.78); 1 rater assigned significantly lower grades than the other (P=0.048). On the structured interview, the overall agreement between raters was 78% (_w=0.93), and there was no overall difference between raters in grades assigned (P=0.17). Rankin grades from the conventional assessment and the structured interview were highly correlated, but there was significantly less disagreement between raters when the structured interview was used (P=0.004).

Conclusions— Variability and bias between raters in assigning patients to Rankin grades may be reduced by use of a structured interview. Use of a structured interview for the scale could potentially improve the quality of results from clinical studies in stroke.

Key Words: clinical trials • disability evaluation • outcome • outcome assessment

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. S.K. Lo, J. O.Y. Cheng, E. M.C. Wong, W. K. Tang, L. K.S. Wong, J. Woo, and T. Kwok Handicap and Its Determinants of Change in Stroke Survivors: One-Year Follow-Up Study Stroke, January 1, 2008; 39(1): 148 - 153. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. J. Quinn, K. R. Lees, H.-G. Hardemark, J. Dawson, and M. R. Walters Initial Experience of a Digital Training Resource for Modified Rankin Scale Assessment in Clinical Trials Stroke, August 1, 2007; 38(8): 2257 - 2261. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. L. Banks and C. A. Marotta Outcomes Validity and Reliability of the Modified Rankin Scale: Implications for Stroke Clinical Trials: A Literature Review and Synthesis Stroke, March 1, 2007; 38(3): 1091 - 1096. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. T. L. Wilson, A. Hareendran, A. Hendry, J. Potter, I. Bone, and K. W. Muir Reliability of the Modified Rankin Scale Across Multiple Raters: Benefits of a Structured Interview Stroke, April 1, 2005; 36(4): 777 - 781. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. M. Greenberg, J. A. Eng, M. Ning, E. E. Smith, and J. Rosand Hemorrhage Burden Predicts Recurrent Intracerebral Hemorrhage After Lobar Hemorrhage Stroke, June 1, 2004; 35(6): 1415 - 1420. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. B. Young, K. R. Lees, and C. J. Weir Strengthening Acute Stroke Trials Through Optimal Use of Disability End Points Stroke, November 1, 2003; 34(11): 2676 - 2680. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. J. Newcommon, T. L. Green, E. Haley, T. Cooke, M. D. Hill, J.T.L. Wilson, A. Hareendran, T. Baird, K.W. Muir, and I. Bone Improving the Assessment of Outcomes in Stroke: Use of a Structured Interview to Assign Grades on the Modified Rankin Scale Stroke, February 1, 2003; 34(2): 377 - 378. [Full Text] [PDF]