Activities of daily living instruments: Optimizing scales for neurologic assessments

Neurology

Volumn 60, Issue 5, 2003, Pages 738-742

  Lindeboom, R ^a   Vermeulen, M ^a   Holman, R ^a   De Haan, R J ^a  

^a ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLEANING; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; LAUNDRY; MEAL; NEUROLOGIC DISEASE; NEUROLOGIC EXAMINATION; NEUROLOGY; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PATIENT MOBILITY; PERSONAL HYGIENE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOMETRY; RATING SCALE; REVIEW; SCORING SYSTEM; SELF CARE; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; WALKING;

EID: 12244294470     PISSN: 00283878     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1212/01.WNL.0000044402.16315.FC     Document Type: Review

References (43)

1. Jennett B, Bond M. Assessment of outcome after severe brain damage. A practical scale. Lancet 1975;1:480-484.
2. Van Swieten JC, Koudstaal PJ, Visser MC, Schouten HJ, van Gijn J. Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients. Stroke 1988;19:604-607.
3. Noseworthy JH, Vandervoort MK, Wong CJ, Ebers GC. Interrater variability with the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and Functional Systems (FS) in a multiple sclerosis clinical trial. The Canadian Cooperation MS Study Group. Neurology 1990;40:971-975.
4. Spector WD, Katz S, Murphy JB, Fulton JP. The hierarchical relationship between Activities of Daily Living and Instrumental Activities of Daily Living. J Chronic Dis 1987;40:481-489.
5. Verbrugge LM, Jette AM. The disablement process. Soc Sci Med 1994; 38:1-14.
6. McDowell I, Newell C, eds. Measuring health. A guide to rating scales and questionnaires. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
7. Wade DT, ed. Measurement in neurological rehabilitation. 7th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
8. Spilker B ed. Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials. 2nd ed. New York: Lippincott-Raven,1996.
9. Holbrook M, Skilbeck CE. An activities index for use with stroke patients. Age Ageing 1983;12:166-170.
10. Lincoln NB, Gladman JR. The Extended Activities of Daily Living scale: a further validation. Disabil Rehabil 1992;14:41-43.
11. Edmans JA, Webster J. The Edmans ADL index: validity and reliability. Disabil Rehabil 1997;19:465-476.
12. Smith DS, Goldenberg E, Ashburn A, et al. Remedial therapy after stroke: a randomised controlled trial. BMJ 1981;282:517-520.
13. Duncan PW, Wallace D, Lai SM, Johnson D, Embretson S, Laster LJ. The stroke impact scale version 2.0. Evaluation of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. Stroke 1999;30:2131-2140.
14. Schoening HA, Iversen IA. Numerical scoring of self-care status: a study of the Kenny self-care evaluation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1968; 49:221-229.
15. Hamrin E III. One year after stroke: a follow-up of an experimental study. Scand J Rehabil Med 1982;14:111-116.
16. Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: the Barthel Index. Md State Med J 1965;14:61-65.
17. Ebrahim S, Nouri F, Barer D. Measuring disability after a stroke. J Epidemiol Community Health 1985;39:86-89.
18. Lincoln NB, Edmans JA. A re-validation of the Rivermead ADL scale for elderly patients with stroke. Age Ageing 1990;19:19-24.
19. Spiegel R, Brunner C, Ermini-Funfschilling D, et al. A new behavioral assessment scale for geriatric out- and in-patients: the NOSGER (Nurses' Observation Scale for Geriatric Patients). J Am Geriatr Soc 1991;39:339-347.
20. Bucks RS, Ashworth DL, Wilcock GK, Siegfried K. Assessment of activities of daily living in dementia: development of the Bristol Activities of Daily Living Scale. Age Ageing 1996;25:113-120.
21. Teunisse S, Derix MM. The interview for deterioration in daily living activities in dementia: agreement between primary and secondary caregivers. Int Psychogeriatr 1997;9(suppl 1):155-162.
22. Pfeffer RI, Kurosaki TT, Harrah CH Jr, Chance JM, Filos S. Measurement of functional activities in older adults in the community. J Gerontol 1982;37:323-329.
23. Hindmarch I, Lehfeld H, De Jong P, Erzigkeit H. The Bayer Activities of Daily Living Scale (B-ADL). Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord 1998; 9(suppl 2):20-26.
24. Gauthier S, Gelinas I, Gauthier L. Functional disability in Alzheimer's disease. Int Psychogeriatr 1997;9(suppl 1):163-165.
25. Canter GJ, De La Torre R, Mier M. A method for evaluating disability in patients with Parkinson's Disease. J Nerv Ment Dis 1961;133:143-147.
26. Lang AET, Fahn S. Assessment of Parkinson's disease. In: Munsat TL, ed. Quantification of neurologic deficit. Boston: Butterworths, 1989: 285-301.
27. Brown RG, MacCarthy B, Jahanshahi M, Marsden CD. Accuracy of self-reported disability in patients with parkinsonism. Arch Neurol 1989;46:955-959.
28. McDowell F, Lee JE, Swift T, Sweet RD, Ogsbury JS, Kessler JT. Treatment of Parkinson's syndrome with L-dihydroxyphenylalanine (levodopa). Ann Intern Med 1970;72:29-35.
29. Brans JWM, Lindeboom R, Snoek JW, et al. Botulinum toxin versus trihexyphenidyl in cervical dystonia: a prospective, randomized, double-blind controlled trial. Neurology 1996;46:1066-1072.
30. Jahanshahi M, Marsden CD. Body concept, disability, and depression in patients with spasmodic torticollis. Behav Neurol 1990;3:117-131.
31. Burke RE, Fahn S, Marsden CD, Bressman SB, Moskowitz C, Friedman J. Validity and reliability of a rating scale for the primary torsion dystonias. Neurology 1985;35:73-77.
32. Lankhorst GJ, Jelles F, Smits RC, et al. Quality of life in multiple sclerosis: the disability and impact profile (DIP). J Neurol 1996;243: 469-474.
33. Bylsma FW, Rothlind J, Hall MR, Folstein SE, Brandt J. Assessment of adaptive functioning in Huntington's disease. Mov Disord 1993;8:183-190.
34. ALS CNTF Treatment Study (ACTS) Phase I-II Study Group. The Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Functional Rating Scale. Assessment of activities of daily living in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Arch Neurol 1996;53:141-147.
35. Semlyen JK, Summers SJ, Barnes MP. The predictive validity of the Newcastle Assessment Form Research (NIA F-R): further development of an alternative measure. J Neurol Rehabil 1997:11:213-218.
36. Streiner DL, Norman GF, eds. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.
37. McHorney CA. Generic health measurement: past accomplishments and a measurement paradigm for the 21st century. Ann Intern Med 1997;127:743-750.
38. Hall KM, Cohen ME, Wright J, Call M, Werner P. Characteristics of the Functional Independence Measure in traumatic spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999;80:1471-1476.
39. Gurka JA, Felmingham KL, Baguley IJ, Schotte DE, Crooks J, Marosszeky JE. Utility of the functional assessment measure after discharge from inpatient rehabilitation. J Head Trauma Rehabil 1999; 14:247-256.
40. Freeman JA, Hobart JC, Thompson AJ. Does adding MS-specific items to a generic measure (the SF-36) improve measurement? Neurology 2001;57:68-74.
41. Hays RD, Morales LS, Reise SP. Item response theory and health outcomes measurement in the 21st century. Med Care 2000;38(suppl 9):1128-1142.
42. Jenkinson C, Fitzpatrick R, Garratt A, Peto V, Stewart-Brown S. Can item response theory reduce patient burden when measuring health status in neurological disorders? Results from Rasch analysis of the SF-36 physical functioning scale (PF-10). J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2001;71:220-224.
43. Holman R, Lindeboom R, Vermeulen M, Glas CAW, De Haan RJ. The Amsterdam Linear Disability Score (ALDS) Project: the calibration of an item bank to measure functional status using item response theory. Mapi Research Institute, Newsletter 27, July to December 2001. Available at www.mapi-research-inst.com.