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 Celani, M. G. Articles by Ricci, S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Celani, M. G. Articles by Ricci, S. Related Collections Acute Stroke Syndromes Other Stroke

(Stroke. 2002;33:218.)
© 2002 American Heart Association, Inc.

Original Contributions

Different Measures for Assessing Stroke Outcome

An Analysis From the International Stroke Trial in Italy

Maria Grazia Celani, MD; Teresa Anna Cantisani, MD; Enrico Righetti, MD; Lorenzo Spizzichino, SD Stefano Ricci, MD on behalf of the Italian International Stroke Trial (IST) Collaborators

From the Servizio Malattie Cerebrovascolari, USL 2, Perugia, Italy.

Correspondence to Dr Maria Grazia Celani, Servizio Malattie Cerebrovascolari, USL 2, Via Guerra 17, 06127 Perugia, Italy. E-mail istitaly{at}unipg.it

Background and Purpose— We sought to assess the relationship between 2 simple questions on recovery (question 1: do you feel that you have made a complete recovery from your stroke?) and dependency (question 2: do you require help from another person for everyday activities?) and the Barthel Index (BI) and Oxford Handicap Scale (OHS), as well as the relationship between BI and OHS, in a large number of Italian stroke survivors who participated in the International Stroke Trial (IST).

Methods— We used data from 2423 patients interviewed by telephone at 6 months after the event. The statistic, sensitivity, and specificity were calculated for several comparisons. Internal consistency for BI was calculated.

Results— The reliability of the dependency question compared with BI=20 (=0.93) and the reliability of the recovery question compared with OHS=0 (=0.89) were good. Sensitivity of the dependency question in predicting whether patients scored BI >18 was 0.98; sensitivity of the recovery question in predicting whether patients scored OHS=0 was 0.99. The reliability of BI=20 compared with OHS <3 was good (=0.87). Internal consistency of BI was very high (Cronbach’s =0.96).

Conclusions— The 2 simple questions are a good means of evaluating outcome from a patient’s view and of dichotomizing the stroke survivor in a time-effective and reliable way.

Key Words: disability evaluation • outcome assessment • stroke, acute

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. Dalemans, L. P de Witte, J. Lemmens, W. J. van den Heuvel, and D. T Wade Measures for rating social participation in people with aphasia: a systematic review Clinical Rehabilitation, June 1, 2008; 22(6): 542 - 555. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Y. Chong, H. S. Lee, B. Boden-Albala, M. C. Paik, and R. L. Sacco Gender differences in self-report of recovery after stroke: The Northern Manhattan Study. Neurology, October 10, 2006; 67(7): 1282 - 1284. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Uyttenboogaart, R. E. Stewart, P. C.A.J. Vroomen, J. De Keyser, and G.-J. Luijckx Optimizing Cutoff Scores for the Barthel Index and the Modified Rankin Scale for Defining Outcome in Acute Stroke Trials Stroke, September 1, 2005; 36(9): 1984 - 1987. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. E. Thwaites, N. D. Bang, N. H. Dung, H. T. Quy, D. T. T. Oanh, N. T. C. Thoa, N. Q. Hien, N. T. Thuc, N. N. Hai, N. T. N. Lan, et al. Dexamethasone for the Treatment of Tuberculous Meningitis in Adolescents and Adults N. Engl. J. Med., October 21, 2004; 351(17): 1741 - 1751. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]