Validation of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, Modified Rankin Scale and Barthel Index in Brazil: The Role of Cultural Adaptation and Structured InterviewingCincura C.a · Pontes-Neto O.M.c · Neville I.S.a · Mendes H.F.c · Menezes D.F.a · Mariano D.C.c · Pereira I.F.a · Teixeira L.A.c · Jesus P.A.P.a · de Queiroz D.C.L.c · Pereira D.F.a · Pinto E.a · Leite J.P.c · Lopes A.A.b · Oliveira-Filho J.a
aStroke Clinic and bEpidemiology Unit of the Federal University of Bahia, Salvador, and cNeurology Service of Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
Do you have an account?
- Rent for 48h to view
- Buy Cloud Access for unlimited viewing via different devices
- Synchronizing in the ReadCube Cloud
- Printing and saving restrictions apply
Rental: USD 8.50
Cloud: USD 20.00
Article / Publication Details
Background: We aimed to validate three widely used scales in stroke research in a multiethnic Brazilian population. Methods: The National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS), modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and Barthel Index (BI) were translated, culturally adapted and applied by two independent investigators. The mRS was applied with or without a previously validated structured interview. Interobserver agreement (kappa statistics) and intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated. Results: 84 patients underwent mRS (56 with and 28 without a structured interview), 57 BI and 62 NIHSS scoring. Intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.902 for NIHSS and 0.967 for BI. For BI, interobserver agreement was good (kappa = 0.70). For mRS, the structured interview improved interobserver agreement (kappa = 0.34 without a structured interview; 0.75 with a structured interview). Conclusion: The NIHSS, BI and mRS show good validity when translated and culturally adapted. Using a structured interview for the mRS improves interobserver concordance rates.
© 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel
- Mansur AP, de Souza MFM, Favarato D, Avakian SD, Machado CLA, Aldrigui JM, Franchini RJA: Stroke and ischemic heart disease mortality trends in Brazil from 1979 to 1996. Neuroepidemiology 2003;22:179–183.
- Cabral NL, Moro C, Silva GR, Scola RH, Werneck LC: Study comparing the stroke unit outcome and conventional ward treatment: a randomized study in Joinville, Brazil. Arq Neuropsiquiatr 2003;61:188–193.
Sociedade Brasileira de Doencas Cerebrovasculares (SBDCV): Brazilian consensus for thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke. Arq Neuropsiquiatr 2002;60:675–680.
- de Caneda MA, Fernandes JG, de Almeida AG, Mugnol FE: Confiabilidade de escalas de comprometimento neurológico em pacientes com acidente vascular cerebral. Arq Neuropsiquiatr 2006;64:690–697.
- Brott T, Adams HP Jr, Olinger CP, et al: Measurements of acute cerebral infarction: a clinical examination scale. Stroke 1989;20:864–870.
- Shah S, Vanclay F, Cooper B: Improving the sensitivity of the Barthel Index for stroke rehabilitation. J Clin Epidemiol 1989;42:703–709.
- Wilson JT, Hareendran A, Hendry A, Potter J, Bone I, Muir KW: Reliability of the modified Rankin Scale across multiple raters: benefits of a structured interview. Stroke 2005;36:777–781.
- 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.
- Josephson SA, Hills NK, Johnston SC: NIH Stroke Scale reliability in ratings from a large sample of clinicians. Cerebrovasc Dis 2006;22:389–395.
- Lyden PD, Lu M, Levine SR, Brott TG, Broderick J, NINDS rtPA Stroke Study Group: A modified National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale for use in stroke clinical trials: preliminary reliability and validity. Stroke 2001;32:1310–1317.
Article / Publication Details
Copyright / Drug Dosage / DisclaimerCopyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.