Barthel index for stroke trials: Development, properties, and application

Stroke

Volumn 42, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 1146-1151

  Quinn, Terence J ^a,b   Langhorne, Peter ^a   Stott, David J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

^b GLASGOW ROYAL INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

activities of daily living; Barthel index; clinimetrics; disabilityscales; outcomes

Indexed keywords

BARTHEL INDEX; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT TOOL; CLINICAL EVALUATION; CLINIMETRY; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; DISEASE SEVERITY; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; METHODOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RATING SCALE; RELIABILITY; REVIEW; SCORING SYSTEM; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; STROKE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; VALIDITY;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; DISABILITY EVALUATION; HUMANS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; STROKE;

EID: 79954601398     PISSN: 00392499     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.598540     Document Type: Review

References (49)

1. Quinn TJ, Dawson J, Walters MR, Lees KR. Functional outcome measures in contemporary stroke trials. Int J Stroke. 2009;3:200-205.
2. Wade DT. Measurement in neurological rehabilitation. Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications; 1992.
3. Wade DT, Collin C. The Barthel ADL Index:a standard measure of physical disability? Int Dis Studies. 1988;10:64-67.
4. McDowell I. Measuring health. A guide to rating scales and questionnaires. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006.
5. Granger CV, Dewis LS, Peters NC, Sherwood CC, Barrett JE. Stroke rehabilitation: analysis of repeated Barthel index measures. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1979;60:14-17. (Pubitemid 9101111)
6. Wylie CM, White BK. A measure of disability. Arch Environ Health. 1964;8:834-839.
7. Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation:the Barthel Index. Maryland State Med J. 1965;14:61-65.
8. Leung SO, Chan CC, Shah S. Development of a Chinese version of the modified Barthel Index. Clin Rehabil. 2007;21:912-922. (Pubitemid 350065464)
9. Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993;46:1417-1432. (Pubitemid 24017263)
10. Ali SM, Mulley GP. Is the Barthel scale appropriate in non-industrialized countries? Disabil Rehabil. 1998;20:195-199. (Pubitemid 28221295)
11. Collin C, Wade DT, Davis S, Horne V. The Barthel ADL index: a reliability study. Int Disabil Studies. 1988;10:61-63.
12. Novak S, Johnson J, Greenwood R. Barthel revisited:making guidelines work. Clin Rehabil. 1996;10:128-134.
13. Shah S, Vanclay F, Cooper B. Improving the sensitivity of the Barthel Index for stroke rehabilitation. J Clin Epidemiol. 1989;42:703-709. (Pubitemid 19213114)
14. Fortinsky RH, Granger CV, Seltzer GB. The use of functional assessments in understanding home care needs. Med Care. 1981;19:489-497. (Pubitemid 11033296)
15. PIcavet HS, van den Bos GA. Comparing survey data on functional disability:the impact of some methodological differences. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1996;50:86-93. (Pubitemid 26070643)
16. Prosiegel M, Bottger S, Schenk T. Der erwertiertr Barthel Index (EBI)-eine neue skala zur erfassung von fahigkeitsstorungen bei neurologischen patieneten. Neurol Rehabil. 1996;1:7-13.
17. Schonle PW. The early rehabilitation Barthel Index. Rehabil. 1995;34: 69-73.
18. Ellul J, Watkins C, Barer D. Estimating total Barthel scores from just three items: the European Stroke Database "minimum dataset" for assessing functional status at discharge from hospital. Age Ageing. 1998; 27:115-122. (Pubitemid 28226949)
19. Hobart JC, Thompson AJ. The five item Barthel Index. J Neurol Neurosurg Psych. 2001;71:225-230. (Pubitemid 32675150)
20. Quinn TJ, Lees KR, Hardemark HG, Dawson J, Walters MR. Initial experience of a digital training resource for modified Rankin scale assessment in clinical trials. Stroke. 2007;38:2257-2261. (Pubitemid 47457565)
21. Richards SH, Peters TJ, Coast J, Gunnell DJ, Darlow MA, Poundsford J. Inter-rater reliability of the Barthel ADL index:how does a researcher compare to a nurse? Clin Rehabil. 2000;14:72-78. (Pubitemid 30072224)
22. Sinoff G, Ore L. The Barthel ADL Index: self reporting versus actual performance in the old-old. JAGS. 1997;45:832-836.
23. Ranhoff AH, Laake K. The Barthel ADL index: Scoring by the physician from patient interview is not reliable. Age Ageing. 1993;23:171-174. (Pubitemid 23164113)
24. Korner-Bitensky N, Wood-Dauphinee S, Siemiatycki J. Barthel Index information elicited overthe telephone: is it reliable? Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1995;74:9-18.
25. Gompertz P, Pound P, Ebrahim S. The reliability of stroke outcome measures. Clin Rehabil. 1993;7:290-296. (Pubitemid 23358730)
26. Ebrahim S, Nouri F, Barer D. Measuring disability after a stroke. J Epidemiol Community Helath. 1985;39:86-89. (Pubitemid 15129873)
27. Hsuh IP, Lee MM, Hsieh CL. Psychometric characteristics of the Barthel activities of daily living index in stroke patients. J Formos Med Assoc. 2001;100:526-532.
28. Green J, Young JA. test-retest reliability study of the Barthel Index, Rivermead Mobility Index, Nottingham extended activities of daily living scale and the Frenchay Activities Index in stroke patients. Disabil Rehabil. 2001;23:670-676. (Pubitemid 33034979)
29. Sainsbury A, Gudrun S, Bansal A, Young JB. Reliability of the Barthel when used with older people. Age Ageing. 2005;34:228-232. (Pubitemid 40711734)
30. Quinn TJ, Dawson J, Walters MR, Lees KR. Reliability of the modified Rankin Scale:systematic review. Stroke. 2009;40:3393-3395.
31. Donaldson SW, Wagner CC, Gresham GE. A unified ADL evaluation form. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1973;54:175-179.
32. Wade DT, Langton-Hewer R. Functional abilities after stroke: measurement, natural history and prognosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psych. 1987;50:177-182. (Pubitemid 17016558)
33. Hertanu JS, Demoposalos JT, Yang WC, Calhoun WF, Fenigstein HA. Stroke rehabilitation correlation and prognostic value of computerized tomography and sequential functional assessments. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1984;65:505-508. (Pubitemid 14030115)
34. Kwon S, Hartzema AG, Duncan PW, Lai SM. Disability measures in stroke-relationship among the Barthel Index, the Functional Independence Measure and the modified Rankin. Stroke. 2004;35:918-923. (Pubitemid 38419803)
35. Huybrechts KF, Caro JJ. The Barthel Index and modified Rankin Scale as prognostic tools for long term outcomes after stroke: a qualitative review of the literature. Cur Med Res Opinion. 2007;23:1627-1636. (Pubitemid 47122172)
36. Pan SL, Wu SC, Lee TK, Chen TH. Reduction of disability after stroke is a more informative predictor of long-term survival than intial disability status. Disab Rehabil. 2007;29:417-423. (Pubitemid 47161316)
37. Quinn TJ, Dawson J, Lees JS, Chang TP, Walters MR, Lees KR. Time spent at home poststroke "home-time" a meaningful and robust outcme measure for stroke trials. Stroke. 2008;39:231-233.
38. Dromerick AW, Edwards DF, Diringer MN. Sensitivity to changes in disability after stroke:comparison of four scales useful in clinical trials. J Rehabil Res Develop. 2003;40:1-8. (Pubitemid 36337060)
39. Hsieh YW, Wang CH, Wu Sc, Chen PC, Sheu CF, Hsieh CL. Establishing the minimal clinically important difference of the Barthel Index in stroke patients. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007;21:233-238.
40. Schepers VP, Ketelaar M, Visser-Meily JM, Dekker J, Lindeman E. Responsiveness of functional health status measures frequently used in stroke research. Disabil Rehabil. 2006;28:1035-1040. (Pubitemid 44322639)
41. Hocking C, Williams M, Broad J, Baskett J. Sensitivity of Shah, Vanclay and Coopers modified Barthel Index. Clin Rehabil. 1999;13:141-147. (Pubitemid 29171410)
42. Cano SJ, O'Connor RJ, Thompson AJ, Hobart JC. Exploring disability rating scale responsiveness II: do more response options help? Neurol. 2006;67:2056-2059. (Pubitemid 44967392)
43. McAvoy E. The use of ADL indices by occupational therapists. Br J Occup Ther. 1991;54:383-385.
44. Irwin P, Rutledge Z, Lowe DA. Report on the national sentinel audit of stroke. London, UK: Royal College of Physicians; 1999.
45. Laake K, Laake P, Ranhoof AH, Sveen U, Wyller TB, Bautz-Holter E. The Barthel ADL Index: factor structure depends upon the category of the patient. Age Ageing. 1995;24:393-397.
46. Van Hartingsveld F, Lucas C, Kwakkel G, Lindeboom R. Improved interpretation of stroke trial results using empirical Barthel Index weights. Stroke. 2006;37:162-166. (Pubitemid 43732066)
47. Balu S. Differences in psychometric properties, cut-off scores and outcomes between the Barthel Index and Modified Rankin Scale in pharmacotherapy-based stroke trials: systematic literature review. Curr Med Res Opinion. 2009;25:1329-1341.
48. Optimising Analysis of Stroke Trials Collaboration. Calculation of sample size for stroke trials assessing functional outcome: comparison of binary and ordinal approaches. Int J Stroke. 2008;3:78-84.
49. Gresham GE, Phillips TF, Labi ML. ADL status in stroke:relative merits of three standard indices. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1980;61:355-358. (Pubitemid 10084988)