Faraj EL-Mabruk, Joce French
1-Neurology Unit, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Garyounis, Benghazi, Libya
2-Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Newcastle, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
JMJ Vol.5 No. 1 (Spring) 2006: 47-50
The dilemma of choosing outcome measure has increased as the end points have broadened. We aimed to further establish the validity of a simple measure of stroke out-come which has been developed for use in large randomized trials. One hundred and thirty survivors from a consecutive series of 135 patients, aged 17-55 years, who were referred with first-ever stroke. The patients or carers were interviewed three months after their stroke and asked two simple questions. The ‘dependency’ question ‘Do you/they require help from another person with everyday activities?’ and the ‘recovery’ question ‘Do you fell that you/they have made a complete recovery from your/ their stroke?’ before being assessed using the Nottingham extended activity of daily living (NEADL) scale. The patients or carers responses to the ‘dependency’ question were very satisfactory with sensitivity of 90% and a specificity of 91% in identifying those with a “good” and “bad” outcome as defined by total NEADL scores and the level of agreement for each patient was excellent (Kappa coefficient, K=0.824). The level of agreement between the response to both ‘dependency’ and ‘recovery’ questions and the total NEADL scores for each patient was moderate (K=0.524). Our results suggest that ‘simple questions’ may be a reasonably valid measure of functional outcome after stroke.
Keywords: Stroke scales, Young adult, Disability, Validity