Defining post-stroke recovery: Implications for design and interpretation of drug trials

Neuropharmacology

Volumn 39, Issue 5, 2000, Pages 835-841

  Duncan, Pamela W ^a   Min Lai, Sue ^a   Keighley, John ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Outcomes; Recovery; Stroke

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; DRUG SCREENING; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STROKE; TECHNIQUE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; AGED; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; COHORT STUDIES; DRUG EVALUATION; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; KANSAS; MALE; NEURONAL PLASTICITY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; QUALITY OF LIFE; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; RESEARCH DESIGN; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SICKNESS IMPACT PROFILE;

EID: 0033950815     PISSN: 00283908     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0028-3908(00)00003-4     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Brott T., Adams H.P., Olinger C.P.et al. Measurements of acute cerebral infarction: a clinical examination scale. Stroke. 20:1989;864-870.
2. Fugl-Meyer A.R., Jaasko L., Leyman I.et al. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient: a method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand. J. Rehab. Med. 7:1975;13-31.
3. Duncan P.W. Measuring recovery of function after stroke. Goldstein L.B. Restorative Neurology. 1999;224-240 Futura, Armonk, NY.
4. Hacke W., Kaste M.et al. Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial of thrombolytic therapy with intravenous alteplase in acute ischemic stroke (ECASS II). Second European-Australasian Acute Stroke Study Investigators. Lancet. 352:1998;1245-1251.
5. Jorgensen H.S., Nakayma H., Raaschou H.et al. Outcome and time course of recovery in stroke. Part 1: the Copenhagen Stroke. Archs Phys. Med. Rehabil. 76:1995;399-405.
6. Kalra L., Crome P. The role of prognostic scores in targeting stroke rehabilitation in the elderly. J. Am. Geriat. Soc. 41:1993;396-400.
7. Lai S.M., Duncan P.W., Keigley J. Prediction of functional outcome after stroke. Stroke. 29:1998;1838-1842.
8. Mahoney F.I., Barthel D.W. Functional evaluation: the Barthel Index. MD State Med. J. 14:1965;61-65.
9. Roberts L., Counsell C. Assessment of clinical outcomes in acute stroke. Stroke. 29:1998;986-991.
10. Sulter G., Steen C., De Keyser J. Use of the Barthel index ad modified Rankin scale in acute stroke trials. Stroke. 30:1999;1538-1541.
11. Van Swieten J.C., Koudstaal P.F., Visser M.C., Schouten H.J.A., van Gigin J. Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients. Stroke. 19:1988;604-607.
12. Ware J.E. SF-36 Health Survey: Manual and Interpretation Guide. 1993;The Health Institute, New England Medical Center, Boston, MA.
13. Ware J.E., Sherbourne C.E. MOS-36 item short form health survey (SF-36): conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care. 30:1992;473-483.
14. WHO, 1980. International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities, and Handicaps. World Health Organization, Geneva.
15. WHO, 1993. World Health Organization. Proposal for the multinational monitoring and determinants in cerebrovascular disease. Monica Project WHO/MNC82.1 REV 1.
16. Wolfson A.D., Sinclair A.J., Bombardier C.et al. Preference measurements for functional status in stroke patients: interrater and intertechnique comparisons. Kane R.L., Kane R.A. Values and Long-Term Care. 1982;Lexington Books, Lexington MA.