Monitoring the functional health status of stroke patients: The value of the Stroke-Adapted Sickness Impact Profile-30

Disability and Rehabilitation

Volumn 26, Issue 11, 2004, Pages 635-640

  Van de Port, I G L ^a   Ketelaar, M ^a   Schepers, V P M ^a   Van den Bos, G A M ^b   Lindeman, E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BRAIN INFARCTION; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HEALTH PROGRAM; HEALTH STATUS; HOSPITAL PATIENT; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MENTAL HEALTH; PATIENT MONITORING; PHYSICAL CAPACITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; RATING SCALE; SCORING SYSTEM; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; SUBARACHNOID HEMORRHAGE; VALIDATION PROCESS;

CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MONITORING, PHYSIOLOGIC; SICKNESS IMPACT PROFILE;

EID: 3042814133     PISSN: 09638288     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09638280410001672481     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Bergner M, Bobbitt RA, Carter WB, Gilson BS. The Sickness Impact Profile: development and final revision of a health status measure. Medical Care 1981; 19: 787-805.
2. de Bruin AF, de Witte LP, Stevens FCJ, Diederiks JPM. Sickness Impact Profile: the state of the art of a generic functional status measure. Social Science and Medicine 1992; 35: 1008-1014.
3. Post MW, de Bruin AF, de Witte LP, Schrijvers A. The SIP68: a measure of health-related functional status in rehabilitation medicine. Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation 1996; 77: 440-445.
4. de Bruin AF, Diederiks JPM, de Witte LP, Stevens FCJ, Philipsen H. The development of a short generic version of the sickness impact profile. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1994; 47: 407-418.
5. Jacobs HM, Touw-Otten FW, de Melker RA. The evaluation of changes in functional health status in patients with abdominal complaints. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1996; 49: 163-171.
6. Nydevik I, Hulter-Asberg K. Subjective dysfunction after stroke. A study with sickness impact profile. Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care 1991; 9: 271-275.
7. Jacobs HM, Luttink A, Touw-Otten FWMM, de Melker RA. The Sickness Impact Profile; results of an evaluation study of the Dutch version. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde 2002; 134: 1950-1954.
8. de Haan RJ, Aaronson N, Limburg M, Hewer RL, van Crevel H. Measuring quality of life in stroke. Stroke 1993; 24: 320-327.
9. De Bruin AF, Buys M, de Witte LP, Diederiks JPM. The sickness impact profile: SIP68, a short generic version. First evaluation of the reliability and reproducibility. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1994; 47: 863-871.
10. Van Straten A, de Haan RJ, Limburg M, Schuling J, Bossuyt PM, Van den Bos GA. A stroke-adapted 30-item version of the Sickness Impact Profile to assess quality of life (SA-SIP30). Stroke 1997; 28: 2155-2161.
11. Van Straten A, Reitsma JB, Limburg M, Van den Bos GA, de Haan RJ. Impact of stroke type on survival and functional health. Cerebrovascular Diseases 2001; 12: 27-33.
12. De Bruin AF, Diederiks JPM, de Witte LP, Stevens FCJ, Philipsen H. SIP68: a shortened version of the Sickness Impact Profile. Maastricht, University of Limburg, Dept Medical Sociology, 2002.
13. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales. A practical guide to their development and use. New York: Oxford University Press Inc., 1995.
14. Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, Gladman DD. Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2000; 53: 459-468.
15. van Bennekom CA, Jelles F, Lankhorst GJ, Bouter LM. Responsiveness of the rehabilitation activities profile and the Barthel index. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1996; 49: 39-44.
16. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic Press, 1977.
17. Van Straten A, de Haan RJ, Limburg M, van den Bos GA. Clinical meaning of the Stroke-Adapted Sickness Impact Profile-30 and the Sickness Impact Profile-136. Stroke 2000; 31: 2610-2615.
18. De Haan RJ, Limburg M, van der Meulen JH, Jacobs HM, Aaronson NK. Quality of life after stroke. Impact of stroke type and lesion location. Stroke 1995; 26: 402-408.
19. De Bruin AF, Diederiks JPM, de Witte LP, Stevens FC, Philipsen H. Assessing the responsiveness of a functional status measure: the Sickness Impact Profile versus the SIP68. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1997; 50: 529-540.
20. Liang MH. Longitudinal construct validity: establishment of clinical meaning in patient evaluative instruments. Medical Care 2000; 38: II84-II90.
21. Buck D, Jacoby A, Massey A, Ford G. Evaluation of measures used to assess quality of life after stroke. Stroke 2000; 31: 2004-2010.
22. Schuling J, Greidanus J, Meyboom-de Jong B. Measuring functional status of stroke patients with the Sickness Impact Profile. Disability & Rehabilitation 1993; 15: 19-23.
23. MacKenzie CR, Charlson ME, DiGioia D, Kelley K. Can the Sickness Impact Profile measure change? An example of scale assessment. Journal of Chronic Diseases 1986; 39: 429-438.
24. Mackenzie AE, Chang AM. Predictors of quality of life following stroke. Disability & Rehabilitation 2002; 24: 259-265.
25. Sneeuw KC, Aaronson NK, de Haan RJ, Limburg M. Assessing quality of life after stroke. The value and limitations of proxy ratings. Stroke 1997; 28: 1541-1549.
26. Tooth LR, McKenna KT, Smith M, O'Rourke P. Further evidence for the agreement between patients with stroke and their proxies on the Frenchay Activities Index. Clinical Rehabilitation 2003; 17: 656-665.
27. Segal ME, Schall RR. Determining functional/health status and its relation to disability in stroke survivors. Stroke 1994; 25: 2391-2397.