The London handicap scale: A re-evaluation of its validity using standard scoring and simple summation

Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery and Psychiatry

Volumn 68, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 365-367

  Jenkinson, Crispin ^a   Mant, Jonathan ^b   Carter, Judy ^c   Wade, Derick ^c   Winner, Simon ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^c RIVERMEAD REHABILITATION CENTRE   (United Kingdom)

^d RADCLIFFE INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

London handicap scale; Outcome measurement; Stroke rehabilitation

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CALCULATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISABILITY; HUMAN; INTERVIEW; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEASUREMENT; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RATING SCALE; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STROKE;

CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; DISABILITY EVALUATION; EVALUATION STUDIES; HUMANS; LONDON; PROGNOSIS; PSYCHIATRIC STATUS RATING SCALES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX;

EID: 0034110401     PISSN: 00223050     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/jnnp.68.3.365     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Harwood R, Gompertz P, Ebrahim S. Handicap one year after stroke: validity of a new scale. J Neurol Neurosur Psychiatry 1994;57:825-9.
2. Ebrahim S. Measurement of impairment, disability and handicap. In: Hopkins A, Costain D, eds. Measuring the outcomes of medical care. London: Royal College of Physicians, 1990:27-41.
3. McDowell I, Newell C. Measuring health: a guide to rating scales and questionnaires. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.
4. McDowell I, Jenkinson C. Development standards for health measures. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy 1996;1:238-46.
5. World Health Organisation. International classification of impairments, disabilities and handicaps. Geneva: WHO, 1980.
6. World Health Organisation. ICIDH-2: International classification of impairments, activities, and participation. A manual of dimensions of disablement and functioning. Beta-1 draft for field trials. Geneva: WHO, 1997.
7. Harwood RH, Ebrahim S. Manual of the London handicap scale. Nottingham: University of Nottingham, 1995.
8. Walker MF, Gladman JRF, Lincoln NB, et al. Occupational therapy for stroke patients not admitted to hospital: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 1999;354:278-80.
9. Harwood R, Rogers A, Dickinson E, et al. Measuring handicap: the London handicap scale, a new outcome measure for chronic disease. Quality in Health Care 1994;3:11-16.
10. Jenkinson C. Why are we weighting? Soc Sci Med 1991;32:1413-16.
11. Feinstein AR. Benefits and obstacles for development of health status assessment in clinical settings. Medical Care 1992;20(suppl):MS50-6.
12. Mant J, Carter J, Wade DT, et al. Randomised controlled trial of a stroke family support organiser. Cerebrovasc Dis 1999;9(suppl 1):123.
13. McHorney CA, Ware JE, Rogers W, et al. The validity and relative precision of MOS short- and long- form health status measures and Dartmouth COOP charts: Results from the medical outcomes study. Medical Care 1992;30: MS253-65.
14. Wade DT, Legh-Smith J, Langton-Hewer R. Social activities after stroke: measurement and natural history using the Frenchay activities index. International Rehabilitation Medicine 1985;7:176-81.
15. Mahoney F, Wood D, Barthel D. Rehabilitation of chronically ill patients: the influence of complications on the final goal. South Med J 1958;51:606-9.
16. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1983;67:361-70.
17. Nelson EC, Landgraf JM, Hays RD, et al. The functional status of patients: how can it be measured in physicians' offices? Medical Care 1990;28:1111-26.
18. Wasson J, Keller A, Rubenstein L, et al. Benefits and obstacles of health status assessment in ambulatory settings: the clinician's point of view. Medical Care 1992;30:MS42-9.
19. Jenkinson C, Lawrence K, McWhinnie D, et al. Sensitivity to change of health status measures in a randomized controlled trial: comparison of the COOP charts and the SF-36. Qual Life Res 1995;4:47-52.
20. Cronbach, LJ. Coefficient α and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrica 1951;16:297-334.
21. Kane RL. Commentary: functional assessment questionnaire for geriatric patients, or the clinical Swiss army knife. Medical Care 1987;25:S178-89.