Assessment of Functioning and Disability After Ischemic Stroke

Background and Purpose— Functioning and disability after ischemic stroke are clinically meaningful and of major relevance to patients. Despite many instruments available to assess these outcomes, little is known about their interrelation and predictive factors. Methods— We prospectively identified 4264 patients with acute ischemic stroke from 30 hospitals in Germany during a 1-year period between 1998 and 1999 and registered them in a common data bank. The patients were centrally followed up via telephone interview after 100 days and 1 year to assess various scales such as the Barthel Index (BI), modified Rankin Scale (MRS), extended Barthel Index (EBI), Short Form-36 Physical Functioning (SF-36 PF), and Center for Epidemiologic Studies–Depression short form (CES-D). Results— Outcome status could be assessed in 67.2% of patients 100 days after hospital admission. Of these, 13.9% had died, 53.7% had regained functional independence (BI <95), 46.3% had no or mild residual symptoms (MRS ≤1), and 44.6% had no higher cognitive deficits on the EBI. Of the patients who personally answered the follow-up questions, 67% had no major physical disability (SF-36 PF <60), and 32.9% reported symptoms classified as depression (CES-D ≥10). The high percentage of patients reaching the maximum score (ceiling effect) in the BI was less pronounced in the MRS and SF-36 PF. The predictive factors for dichotomized outcomes on each scale were similar for adverse functioning and disability but varied considerably for depression. Conclusions— To avoid ceiling effects in outcome distribution of patients treated in specialized stroke centers, the MRS and SF-36 PF instruments are preferable to the BI. Parametric use of the SF-36 PF could further improve outcome measurement by considering individual treatment effects.

[1]  R. Bloch,et al.  Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients. , 1988, Stroke.

[2]  J Siemiatycki,et al.  Health-related information postdischarge: telephone versus face-to-face interviewing. , 1994, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[3]  C. Anderson,et al.  Validation of the Short Form 36 (SF-36) health survey questionnaire among stroke patients. , 1996, Stroke.

[4]  P. Heuschmann,et al.  A prospective community-based study of stroke in Germany--the Erlangen Stroke Project (ESPro): incidence and case fatality at 1, 3, and 12 months. , 1998, Stroke.

[5]  M. Kaste,et al.  Frequency and clinical determinants of poststroke depression. , 1998, Stroke.

[6]  P Sandercock,et al.  Qualitative comparison of the reliability of health status assessments with the EuroQol and SF-36 questionnaires after stroke. United Kingdom Collaborators in the International Stroke Trial. , 1998, Stroke.

[7]  J E Ware,et al.  Overview of the SF-36 Health Survey and the International Quality of Life Assessment (IQOLA) Project. , 1998, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[8]  F. Mahoney,et al.  FUNCTIONAL EVALUATION: THE BARTHEL INDEX. , 2018, Maryland state medical journal.

[9]  R B D'Agostino,et al.  Stroke risk profile: adjustment for antihypertensive medication. The Framingham Study. , 1994, Stroke.

[10]  J. De Keyser,et al.  Use of the Barthel index and modified Rankin scale in acute stroke trials. , 1999, Stroke.

[11]  D L Patrick,et al.  Screening for depression in well older adults: evaluation of a short form of the CES-D (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale). , 1994, American journal of preventive medicine.

[12]  M. Bullinger [Assessment of health related quality of life with the SF-36 Health Survey]. , 1996, Die Rehabilitation.

[13]  S. Black,et al.  The Sunnybrook Stroke Study: a prospective study of depressive symptoms and functional outcome. , 1998, Stroke.

[14]  F. D. Weinfeld,et al.  The National Survey of Stroke. Clinical findings. , 1981, Stroke.

[15]  Tau Fluvalinate,et al.  The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products , 1997 .

[16]  C. Sherbourne,et al.  The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) , 1992 .

[17]  C. Counsell,et al.  Assessment of clinical outcomes in acute stroke trials. , 1998, Stroke.

[18]  T. Brott,et al.  Improved Reliability of the NIH Stroke Scale Using Video Training , 1994, Stroke.

[19]  G P Samsa,et al.  Are health-related quality-of-life measures affected by the mode of administration? , 1996, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[20]  J. Slattery,et al.  Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients. , 1989, Stroke.

[21]  N L Geller,et al.  Use of a global test for multiple outcomes in stroke trials with application to the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke t-PA Stroke Trial. , 1996, Stroke.

[22]  R. Schall,et al.  Determining Functional/Health Status and Its Relation to Disability in Stroke Survivors , 1994, Stroke.

[23]  P. Duncan,et al.  Defining post-stroke recovery: implications for design and interpretation of drug trials , 2000, Neuropharmacology.

[24]  N. Taub,et al.  Assessment of Scales of Disability and Handicap for Stroke Patients , 1991, Stroke.

[25]  I Litvan,et al.  A reappraisal of reliability and validity studies in stroke. , 1996, Stroke.

[26]  U. Ellert,et al.  [The SF-36 in the Federal Health Survey--description of a current normal sample]. , 1999, Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)).

[27]  Gwyn McClelland Survivors , 1891, The Hospital.

[28]  W. O'Fallon,et al.  Ischemic stroke , 1998, Neurology.