Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Determining the cut-off score for the Modified Barthel Index and the Modified Rankin Scale for assessment of functional independence and residual disability after stroke

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Assessment of functional independence and residual disability is very important for measuring treatment outcome after stroke. The modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and the modified Barthel Index (MBI) are commonly used scales to measure disability or dependence in activities of daily living (ADL) of stroke survivors. Lack of consensus regarding MBI score categories has caused confusion in interpreting stroke outcomes. The purpose of this study was to identify the optimal corresponding MBI and modified Rankin scale (mRS) grades for categorization of MBI. The Korean versions of the MBI (K-MBI) and mRS were collected from 5,759 stroke patients at 3 months after onset of stroke. The sensitivity and specificity were calculated at K-MBI score cutoffs for each mRS grade to obtain optimally corresponding K-MBI scores and mRS grades. We also plotted receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of sensitivity and specificity and determined the area under the curve (AUC). The K-MBI cutoff points with the highest sum of sensitivity and specificity were 100 (sensitivity 0.940; specificity 0.612), 98 (sensitivity 0.904; specificity 0.838), 94 (sensitivity 0.885; specificity 0.937), 78 (sensitivity 0.946; specificity, 0.973), and 55 (sensitivity 937; specificity 0.986) for mRS grades 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. From this result, the K-MBI cutoff score range for each mRS grade can be obtained. For mRS grade 0, the K-MBI cutoff score is 100, indicating no associated score range. For mRS grades 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, the K-MBI score ranges is from 99 to 98, 97 to 94, 93 to 78, 77 to 55, and under 54, respectively.The AUC for the ROC curve was 0.791 for mRS grade 0, 0.919 for mRS grade 1, 0.970 for mRS grade 2, 0.0 for mRS grade 3, and 0.991 for mRS grade 4. The K-MBI cutoff score ranges for representing mRS grades were variable; mRS grades 0, 1, and 2 had narrow K-MBI score ranges, while mRS grades 3, 4, and 5 exhibited broad K-MBI score ranges. mRS grade seemed to sensitively differentiate mild residual disability of stroke survivors, whereas K-MBI provided more specific information of the functional status of stroke survivors with moderate to severe residual impairment.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Cerebral vascular accidents in patients over the age of 60. II. Prognosis.

          J. Rankin (1957)
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Improving the assessment of outcomes in stroke: use of a structured interview to assign grades on the modified Rankin Scale.

            The modified Rankin Scale is widely used to assess changes in activity and lifestyle after stroke, but it has been criticized for its subjectivity. The purpose of the present study was to compare conventional assessment on the modified Rankin Scale with assessment through a structured interview. Sixty-three patients with stroke 6 to 24 months previously were interviewed and graded independently on the modified Rankin Scale by 2 observers. These observers then underwent training in use of a structured interview for the scale that covered 5 areas of everyday function. Eight weeks after the first assessment, the same observers reassessed 58 of these patients using the structured interview. Interrater reliability was measured with the kappa statistic (weighted with quadratic weights). For the scale applied conventionally, overall agreement between the 2 raters was 57% (kappa(w)=0.78); 1 rater assigned significantly lower grades than the other (P=0.048). On the structured interview, the overall agreement between raters was 78% (kappa(w)=0.93), and there was no overall difference between raters in grades assigned (P=0.17). Rankin grades from the conventional assessment and the structured interview were highly correlated, but there was significantly less disagreement between raters when the structured interview was used (P=0.004). Variability and bias between raters in assigning patients to Rankin grades may be reduced by use of a structured interview. Use of a structured interview for the scale could potentially improve the quality of results from clinical studies in stroke.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Functional outcome measures in contemporary stroke trials.

              Various instruments are used to describe poststroke functional outcome, with limited consensus as to optimal end-point for clinical trial use. Many of the popular assessment tools are administered with little formal guidance on best practice. Thus there is potential for substantial heterogeneity in functional outcome assessment poststroke, with consequent effects on trial quality. We examined functional assessment methodology in recent stroke trials. We reviewed six journals representing high-impact international publications in the fields of: stroke (Stroke); neurology (Neurology, Lancet Neurology) and internal medicine (Lancet, New England Journal Medicine; Journal of the American Medical Association). Journals were hand searched for all interventional studies in stroke patients between 2001 and 2006 inclusive. Chosen manuscripts were then analyzed for outcome assessment methodology. We identified 126 trials, comprising a mix of early hypothesis generating studies through to multi-centre trials (phase I: four trials; phase II: 46 trials; phase III: 20 trials; noninvestigational medicinal product studies: 56 trials). The median number of patients assessed per trial was 100. Across the trials, 47 different outcome measures were used. One hundred trials had functional outcome assessment as the primary study end-point. The median number of outcome measures was two per trial (range 1-9). The modified Rankin scale was the most prevalent outcome assessment (64.3%); followed by Barthel index (40.5%). A minority of trials (33.3%) provided full details on outcome assessment methodology. Among these trials there was substantial heterogeneity in data collection procedures. There is heterogeneity in the use of functional outcome measures in stroke trials. This compromises comparison and meta-analysis. Trialists continue to use poorly validated approaches to outcome assessment. Given the potential effects on data quality, explicit description of methodology should be mandatory for all trials and rigour is desirable.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: InvestigationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curation
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curation
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curation
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curation
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Supervision
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curation
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curation
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysis
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curation
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curation
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curation
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Methodology
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curation
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curation
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curation
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Funding acquisition
                Role: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: InvestigationRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                29 January 2020
                2020
                : 15
                : 1
                : e0226324
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Center for Prevention and Rehabilitation, Heart Vascular and Stroke Institute, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
                [2 ] Department and Research Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
                [3 ] Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, School of Medicine, Chungnam National University, Daejeon, Republic of Korea
                [4 ] Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea
                [5 ] Department of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwangju, Republic of Korea
                [6 ] Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Yangsan, Republic of Korea
                [7 ] Department of Preventive Medicine, Wonkwang University School of Medicine, Iksan, Republic of Korea
                [8 ] Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Kyungpook National University, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University Hospital, Daegu, Republic of Korea
                [9 ] Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Wonkwang University School of Medicine, Iksan, Republic of Korea
                [10 ] Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Jeju National University Hospital, University of Jeju College of Medicine, Jeju, Republic of Korea
                [11 ] Department of Health Convergence, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
                [12 ] Division of Chronic Disease Prevention, Korea Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Osong, Republic of Korea
                [13 ] Department of Statistics and Institute of Statistics, Hallym University, Chuncheon, Republic of Korea
                [14 ] Departmen of Health Sciences and Technology, Department of Medical Device Management & Research, Department of Digital Health, SAIHST, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
                Massachusetts General Hospital, UNITED STATES
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2548-545X
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0177-0192
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6101-8851
                Article
                PONE-D-18-34574
                10.1371/journal.pone.0226324
                6988933
                31995563
                1c3ddd66-4558-4587-b1fd-d0c8d2f6bae8
                © 2020 Lee et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 3 December 2018
                : 25 November 2019
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 3, Pages: 11
                Funding
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100003669, Korea Centers for Disease Control & Prevention;
                Award ID: 2016E-33003-02
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: National Research Foundation of Korea
                Award ID: NRF-2017R1A2A1A05000730
                Award Recipient :
                This work was supported by a grant from the Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2016E-33003-02; www.cdc.go.kr) and National Research Foundation of Korea by the Korean government (MSIP) (NRF-2017R1A2A1A05000730; www.nrf.re.kr) to YHK. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Public and Occupational Health
                Disabilities
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Health Care
                Quality of Life
                Activities of Daily Living
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Research Assessment
                Research Validity
                People and Places
                Population Groupings
                Ethnicities
                Korean People
                Computer and Information Sciences
                Computer Software
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Neurology
                Cerebrovascular Diseases
                Stroke
                Ischemic Stroke
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Vascular Medicine
                Stroke
                Ischemic Stroke
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Neurology
                Cerebrovascular Diseases
                Stroke
                Hemorrhagic Stroke
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Vascular Medicine
                Stroke
                Hemorrhagic Stroke
                Social Sciences
                Sociology
                Education
                Workshops
                Custom metadata
                The KOSCO study is ongoing, and the internal regulations of the Korea Center for Disease Control and Prevention (KCDC), prohibit data from being open to the public until the study has been completed. Data are available upon request for researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data. The contact information for the data access commitee is as follows: Seungchang Kim, Department of Statistics, Hallym University, Chuncheon, Gangwon; Phone: +82-10-3749-2622; E-mail: 22bcool@ 123456naver.com .

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article