The impact of self-reported cumulative comorbidity on stroke recovery [2]

Age and Ageing

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 195-198

  Studenski, Stephanie A ^a   Lai, Sue Min ^b   Duncan, Pamela W ^c   Rigler, Sally K ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGED; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; CHI SQUARE TEST; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMORBIDITY; CONGESTIVE HEART FAILURE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; DIABETES MELLITUS; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HEART INFARCTION; HUMAN; LETTER; LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MUSCULOSKELETAL DISEASE; PHYSICAL PERFORMANCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RATING SCALE; RISK FACTOR; SCORING SYSTEM; SELF REPORT; STROKE; SYMPTOMATOLOGY;

AGED; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; COHORT STUDIES; COMORBIDITY; FEMALE; HUMANS; KANSAS; MALE; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SELF DISCLOSURE; SURVIVORS;

EID: 1542359589     PISSN: 00020729     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afh056     Document Type: Letter

References (38)

1. Stineman MG. Measuring casemix, severity, and complexity in geriatric patients undergoing rehabilitation. Med Care 1997; 35: 90-112.
2. Lai SM, Duncan PW, Keighley J. Prediction of functional outcome after stroke: comparison of the Orpington Prognostic Scale and the NIH Stroke Scale. Stroke 1998; 29: 1838-42.
3. Ferrucci L, Bandinelli S, Guralnik JM et al. Recovery of functional status after stroke. A postrehabilitation follow-up study. Stroke 1993; 24: 200-5.
4. Kwakkel G, Wagenaar RC, Kollen BJ, Lankhorst GJ. Predicting disability in stroke - a critical review of the literature. Age Ageing 1996; 25: 479-89.
5. Inouye M, Kishi K, Ikeda Y et al. Prediction of functional outcome after stroke rehabilitation. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2000; 79: 513-8.
6. Loewen SC, Anderson BA. Predictors of stroke outcome using objective measurement scales. Stroke 1990; 21: 78-81.
7. Weimar C, Ziegler A, Konig IR, Diener HC. Predicting functional outcome and survival after acute ischemic stroke. J Neurol 2002; 249: 888-95.
8. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987; 40: 373-83.
9. Parmelee PA, Thuras PD, Katz IR, Lawton MP. Validation of the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale in a geriatric residential population. J Am Geriatr Soc 1995; 43: 130-7.
10. Buntinx F, Niclaes L, Suetens C, Jans B, Mertens R, Van den Akker M. Evaluation of Charlson's comorbidity index in elderly living in nursing homes. J Clin Epidemiol 2002; 55: 1144-7.
11. Inouye SK, Peduzzi PN, Robison JT, Hughes JS, Horwitz RI, Concato J. Importance of functional measures in predicting mortality among older hospitalised patients. JAMA 1998; 279: 1187-93.
12. Covinsky KE, Justice AC, Rosenthal GE, Palmer RM, Landefeld CS. Measuring prognosis and case mix in hospitalized elders. The importance of functional status. J Gen Int Med 1997; 12: 203-8.
13. Bennett JA, Riegel B, Bittner V, Nichols J. Validity and reliability of the NYHA classes for measuring research outcomes in patients with cardiac disease. Heart Lung 2002; 31: 262-70.
14. Mor V, Laliberte L, Morris JN, Wiemann M. The Karnofsky Performance Status Scale. An examination of its reliability and validity in a research setting. Cancer 1984; 53: 2002-7.
15. Extermann M. Measuring comorbidity in older cancer patients. Eur J Cancer 2000; 36: 453-71.
16. Kaplan MH, Feinstein AR. The importance of classifying initial co-morbidity in evaluating the outcome of diabetes mellitus. J Chronic Dis 1974; 27: 387-404.
17. Linn BS, Linn MW, Gurel L. Cumulative illness rating scale. J Am Geriatr Soc 1968; 16: 622-6.
18. Greenfield S, Blanco DM, Elashoff RM, Ganz PA. Patterns of care related to age of breast cancer patients. JAMA 1987; 257: 2766-70.
19. Liu M, Domen K, Chino N. Comorbidity measures for stroke outcome research: a preliminary study. Arch Phys Med Rehab 1997; 78: 166-72.
20. Liu M, Tsuji T, Tsujiuchi K, Chino N. Comorbidities in stroke patients as assessed with a newly developed comorbidity scale. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1999; 78: 416-24.
21. Rigler S, Studenski S, Wallace D, Reker D, Duncan PW. Comorbidity Adjustment for Functional Outcomes in Community-dwelling Older Adults. Clin Rehabil 2002; 16: 420-28.
22. Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional Evaluation: the Barthel Index. Mar Med J 1965; 14: 61-65.
23. Lawton MP. Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL): Self-rated version. Psychopharm Bull 1988; 24: 785-7.
24. Ware JF, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): 1. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992; 30: 473-83.
25. The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke rt-PA Stroke Study Group. Tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 1995; 333: 1581-7.
26. Hacke W, Kaste M, Fiechi C et al. Randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial of thrombolytic therapy with intravenous alteplase in acute ischaemic stroke (ECASS II). Lancet 1998; 352: 1245-51.
27. Stewart AL, Hays RD, Ware JE. The MOS short-form general health survey. Med Care 1988; 26: 724-35.
28. Kalra L, Dale P, Crome P. Evaluation of a clinical score for prognostic stratification of elderly stroke patients. Age Aging 1994; 23: 492-8.
29. Kalra L, Crome P. The Role of Prognostic Scores in Targeting Stroke Rehabilitation in Elderly Patients. J Am Geriatr Soc 1993; 41: 396-400.
30. Brott THP, Adams J, Olinger CP et al. Measurements of Acute Cerebral Infarction: A Clinical Examination Scale. Stroke 1989; 20: 864-70.
31. Stineman MG, Escarce JJ, Tassoni CJ, Goin JE, Granger CV, Williams SV. Diagnostic coding and medical rehabilitation length of stay: their relationship. Arch Phys Med Rehab 1998; 79: 241-8.
32. Stineman MG, Ross RN, Williams SV, Goin JE, Granger CV. A functional diagnostic complexity index for rehabilitation medicine: measuring the influence of many diagnoses on functional independence and resource use. Arch Phys Med Rehab 2000; 81: 549-57.
33. Giaquinto S, Buzzelli S, Di Francesco L et al. On the prognosis of outcome after stroke. Acta Neurol Scand 1999; 100: 202-8.
34. Giaquinto S, Palma E, Maiolo I et al. Importance and evaluation of comorbidity in rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil 2001; 23: 296-9.
35. Patrick L, Knoefel F, Gaskowski P, Rexroth D. Medical comorbidity and rehabilitation efficiency in geriatric inpatients. J Am Geriatr Soc 2001; 49: 1471-7.
36. Katz JN, Chang LC, Sangha O, Fossel AH, Bates DW. Can comorbidity be measured by questionnaire rather than medical record review? Med Care 1996; 34: 73-84.
37. Stier DM, Greenfield S, Lubeck DP et al. Quantifying comorbidity in a disease-specific cohort: adaptation of the total illness burden index to prostate cancer. Urology 1999; 54: 424-9.
38. Fried LP, Bandeen-Roche K, Kasper JD, Guralnik JM. Association of comorbidity with disability in older women: the women's health and aging study. J Clin Epidemiol 1999; 52: 27-37.