Published Online
on January 26, 2006

A more recent version of this article appeared on March 1, 2006

This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 37/3/920    most recent 01.STR.0000202679.88377.e4v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted 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 Bruno, A. Articles by Williams, L. S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Bruno, A. Articles by Williams, L. S. Pubmed/NCBI databases Compound via MeSH Substance via MeSH Medline Plus Health Information Clinical Trials Stroke Related Collections Acute Cerebral Infarction Other Stroke

Submitted on November 28, 2005
Revised on December 16, 2005
Accepted on December 20, 2005

Using Change in the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale to Measure Treatment Effect in Acute Stroke Trials

Askiel Bruno MD^*; Chandan Saha PhD; and Linda S. Williams MD

From the Department of Neurology (A.B., L.S.W.), Roudebush VA Medical Center (L.S.W.), and Section of Biostatistics (C.S.), Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis.

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: abruno{at}iupui.edu.

Background and Purpose--Outcome measures in acute stroke trials are being refined. Changes in neurological deficits might be useful outcome measures because they can measure the entire spectrum of deficits.

Methods--We analyzed data from the acute stroke treatment trial Trial of Org 10172 in Acute Stroke Treatment (TOAST). Using logistic regression analysis, we modeled the probability of the TOAST predefined very favorable outcome (VFO; both Glasgow Outcome Scale 1 and modified Barthel Index 19 to 20) at 3 months. Within-subject changes (baseline-3 months) on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) was the main predictor of interest.

Results--The baseline median NIHSS for the entire TOAST cohort was 7, and it improved by 4 points (interquartile range 3 to 6) among 603 patient with VFO and by 2 points (interquartile range -1 to 5) among 638 patients without a VFO (P<0.001). The odds for VFO increased by 2.29 (95% CI, 2.06 to 2.54; P<0.001) for each 1-point improvement on the NIHSS. In receiver operating characteristic analysis, final NIHSS 2 was a good predictor of VFO, but no single NIHSS change cut point was a good predictor of VFO.

Conclusions--NIHSS change appears to be a useful outcome measure for acute stroke trials and is not fully comparable to dichotomized functional outcomes.

Key words: outcome • recovery of function • stroke, acute

This article has been cited by other articles:

				W. A. Gray, S. Chaturvedi, P. Verta, and on behalf of the Investigators and the Executive C Thirty-Day Outcomes for Carotid Artery Stenting in 6320 Patients From 2 Prospective, Multicenter, High-Surgical-Risk Registries Circ Cardiovasc Interv, June 1, 2009; 2(3): 159 - 166. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K.-c. Lin, Y.-h. Huang, Y.-w. Hsieh, and C.-y. Wu Potential Predictors of Motor and Functional Outcomes After Distributed Constraint-Induced Therapy for Patients With Stroke Neurorehabil Neural Repair, May 1, 2009; 23(4): 336 - 342. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. Khatri, R. A. Taylor, V. Palumbo, V. Rajajee, J. M. Katz, J. A. Chalela, A. Geers, J. Haymore, D. M. Kolansky, S. E. Kasner, et al. The safety and efficacy of thrombolysis for strokes after cardiac catheterization. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., March 4, 2008; 51(9): 906 - 911. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. A. Koziol and A. C. Feng On the Analysis and Interpretation of Outcome Measures in Stroke Clinical Trials: Lessons From the SAINT I Study of NXY-059 for Acute Ischemic Stroke Stroke, October 1, 2006; 37(10): 2644 - 2647. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. Khatri and J. Broderick Measuring Treatment Effect in Acute Stroke Trials Stroke, September 1, 2006; 37(9): 2204 - 2204. [Full Text] [PDF]