| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Submitted on November 28, 2006
From the Geriatric Medicine (G.M., J.L., C.G., A.Y., S.L.), School of Clinical Sciences and Community Health, University of Edinburgh, New Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, and the Division of Psychiatry (M.S.), School of Molecular and Clinical Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Royal Edinburgh Hospital, Edinburgh, Scotland. * To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: gillian.e.mead{at}ed.ac.uk.
Background and Purpose--There is little information on how to best measure poststroke fatigue. Our aim was to identify which currently available fatigue scale is most valid, feasible, and reliable in stroke patients. Methods--Fatigue scales were identified by systematic search, and the 5 with the best face validity were identified by expert consensus. Feasibility (ie, did patients provide answers?) and internal consistency (an aspect of reliability) of these scales were evaluated by interviewing 55 stroke patients. Test-retest reliability was assessed by reinterviewing 51 patients, interrater reliability was assessed by rerating audio recordings, and convergent validity was assessed by measuring the correlation between scale scores. Results--Of the 52 scales identified, the SF-36v2 (vitality component), the fatigue subscale of the Profile of Mood States, the Fatigue Assessment Scale, the general subscale of the Multidimensional Fatigue Symptom Inventory, and the Brief Fatigue Inventory had the best face validity. The Brief Fatigue Inventory was unfeasible to administer and was omitted. Of the remaining 4 scales, the Fatigue Assessment Scale had the poorest internal consistency. Test-retest reliability for individual scale questions ranged from fair to good; the Fatigue Assessment Scale had the narrowest limits of agreement for the total score, indicating the best test-retest reliability. Interrater reliability for individual questions ranged from good to very good, and there was no significant mean difference in total scores for any scale. Convergent validity was moderate to high for the total scores of the 4 scales. Conclusions--All four scales were valid and feasible to administer to stroke patients. The Fatigue Assessment Scale had the best test-retest reliability but the poorest internal consistency.
Revised on January 15, 2007
Accepted on January 24, 2007
Evaluation of Fatigue Scales in Stroke Patients
Gillian Mead MD*;
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
C. Winward, C. Sackley, Z. Metha, and P. M. Rothwell A Population-Based Study of the Prevalence of Fatigue After Transient Ischemic Attack and Minor Stroke Stroke, March 1, 2009; 40(3): 757 - 761. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J.A. Harbison, S. Walsh, and R.A. Kenny Hypertension and daytime hypotension found on ambulatory blood pressure is associated with fatigue following stroke and TIA QJM, February 1, 2009; 102(2): 109 - 115. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. H. Dobkin Fatigue Versus Activity-Dependent Fatigability in Patients With Central or Peripheral Motor Impairments Neurorehabil Neural Repair, April 1, 2008; 22(2): 105 - 110. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
|
Stroke Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 2007 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |