Critical Appraisal and Review of the Rankin Scale and Its Derivatives

Vol. 26, No. 1, 2006

View or print article as PDF (161 KB)

Medline Abstract (ID 16272826)

Medline Related Articles

Download Citation

Cited In

Editorial Review

Critical Appraisal and Review of the Rankin Scale and Its Derivatives
Peter Wayne New^{a, b}, Rachelle Buchbinder^{b, c}

^aRehabilitation and Aged Services Program, Kingston Center, Southern Health, Melbourne,
^bDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, and
^cMonash Department of Clinical Epidemiology at Cabrini Hospital, Malvern, Australia

Address of Corresponding Author

Neuroepidemiology 2006;26:4-15 (DOI: 10.1159/000089536)

Key Words

Stroke
Clinimetric
Outcome assessment

Abstract

Background and Purpose:Efforts to reduce stroke burden require accurate assessment of outcomes in order to compare treatments. The Rankin Scale and its derivatives, the Modified Rankin Scale and the Oxford Handicap Scale, taken together, are among the most common outcome measures that have been used in stroke research. The aim of this study was to perform a critical appraisal of the clinimetric properties of these scales. It was also planned to review the use of these scales in a selection of articles to illustrate concerns raised by the critical appraisal. Summary of Review: A literature search was performed using electronic databases to locate relevant articles about the reviewed scales. The scales were appraised using a structured format regarding the following properties: purpose, development, presentation, language, method of administration, content validity, face validity, feasibility, construct validity, reliability, responsiveness, and generalizability. There are concerns in each of the appraised areas regarding the clinimetric properties of these scales. Conclusion: Further work is needed to improve the clinimetric properties of the reviewed scales to ensure that they are more useful tools in determining the outcome of stroke. Alternatively, a newer global outcome scale with improved clinimetric properties may be a better option for future stroke research.

References

1.: Murray CJL, Lopez AD: Mortality by cause for eight regions of the world: global burden of disease study. Lancet 1997;349:1269-1276.
2.: Murray CJ, Lopez AD: The Global Burden of Disease: a comprehensive assessment of mortality and disability from disease, injuries and risk factors in 1990 and projected to 2020. Cambridge, Harvard School of Public Health on behalf of the World Health Organization and the World Bank, 1996.
3.: Rankin J: Cerebral vascular accidents in people over the age of 60. II. Prognosis. Scot Med J 1957;2:200-215.
4.: Van Swieten JC, Koudstaal PJ, Visser MC, Schouten HJA, Van Gijn J: Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients. Stroke 1988;19:604-607.
5.: Bamford JM, Sandercock AG, Warlow CP, Slattery J: Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients (letter). Stroke 1989;20:828.
6.: Lyden PD, Lau GT: A critical appraisal of stroke evaluation and rating scales. Stroke 1991;22:1345-1352.
7.: D'Olhaberriague L, Litvan I, Mitsias P, Mansbach HH: A reappraisal of reliability and validity studies in stroke. Stroke 1996;27:2331-2336.
8.: Sulter G, Steen C, De Keyser J: Use of Barthel index and modified rankin scale in acute stroke trials. Stroke 1999;30:1538-1541.
9.: Duncan PW, Jorgensen HS, Wade DT: Outcome measures in acute stroke trials. A systematic review and some recommendations to improve practice. Stroke 2000;31:1429-1438.
10.: Bombardier C, Tugwell P: Methodological considerations in functional assessment. J Rheumatol 1987;14(suppl 15):6-10.
11.: Feinstein AR: Clinimetrics. Yale University Press, 1987.
12.: Streiner D, Norman G: Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use, ed. 3. New York, Oxford University Press, 2003.
13.: Buchbinder R, Goel V, Bombardier C, Hogg-Johnson S: Classification systems of soft tissue disorders of the neck and upper limb: Do they satisfy methodological guidelines? J Clin Epidemiol 1996;49:141-149.
14.: Bamford JM, Vessey M, Fowler G, Molyneux A, Hughes T, Burn J, et al: A prospective study of acute cerebrovascular disease in the community: The Oxfordshire Community Stroke Project 1981-1986. 1. Methodology, demography and incident cases of first-ever stroke. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1988;51:1373-1380.
15.: Tilley BC, Marler J, Geller NL, Lu M, Legler J, Brott T, et al: Use of a global test for multiple outcomes in stroke trails with application to the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke t-PA stroke trial. Stroke 1996;27:2136-2142.
16.: Wolfe CDA, Taub NA, Woodrow EJ, Burney PGJ: Assessment of scales of disability and handicap for stroke patients. Stroke 1991;22:1242-1244.
17.: De Haan R, Horn J, Limburg M, Van Der Meulen J, Bossuyt P: A comparison of five stroke scales with measurement of disability, handicap and quality of life. Stroke 1993;24:1178-1181.
18.: Jailllard AS on behalf of the MAST-E group: Value of phone interview in stroke outcome assessment (abstract). Cerebrovasc Dis 1995;5:269.
19.: Wilson JTL, Hareendran A, Grant M, Baird T, Schulz UGR, Muir KW, et al: Improving the assessment of outcomes in stroke. Use of a structured interview to assign grades on the Modified Rankin Scale. Stroke 2002;33:2243-2246.
20.: Berge E, Barer D: Could stroke trials be missing important treatment effects? Cerebrovasc Dis 2002;13:73-75.
21.: Newcommon NJ, Green TL, Haley E, Cooke T, Hill MD: Improving the Assessment of Outcomes in Stroke: Use of a Structured Interview to Assign Grades on the Modified Rankin Scale (letter). Stroke 2003;34:377-378.
22.: Dromerick AW, Edwards DF, Diringer MN: Sensitivity to changes in disability after stroke: A comparison of four scales useful in clinical trials. J Rehabil Res Dev 2003;40:1-8.
23.: McNaughton H, Weatherall M, Taylor W, McPherson K: Factors influencing rate of Barthel Index change in hospital following stroke. Clin Rehabil 2001;15:422-427.
24.: Lai SM, Duncan PW: Stroke recovery profile and the Modified Rankin Scale. Neuroepidemiology 2001;20:26-30.
25.: UK-TIA Study Group: The UK-TIA aspirin trial: Interim results. Br Med J 1988;296:316-320.
26.: Di Carlo A, Lamassa M, Pracucci G, Basile AM, Trefoloni G, Vanni P, et al: Stroke in the very old. Clinical presentation and determinants of 3-month functional outcome: a European perspective. Stroke 1999;30:2313-2319.
27.: Pinto AN, Melo TP, Lourenço ME, Leandro MJ, Brázio A, Carvalho L, et al: Can a clinical classification of stroke predict complications and treatments during hospitalization? Cerebrovasc Dis 1998;8:204-209.
28.: Ferro JM, Crespo M: Prognosis after transient ischaemic attack and ischaemic stroke in young adults. Stroke 1994;25:1611-1616.
29.: Hacke W, Kaste M, Fieschi C, Toni D, Lesaffre E, Von Kummer R, et al: Intravenous thrombolysis with recombinant tissue plasminogen activator for acute hemispheric stroke: the European Cooperative Acute Stroke Study (ECASS). JAMA 1995;274:1017-1025.
30.: Steiner T, Bluhmki E, Kaste M, Toni D, Trouillas P, Von Kummer R, et al: The ECASS 3-hour cohort. Secondary analysis of ECASS data by time stratification. Cerebrovasc Dis 1998;8:198-203.
31.: Salgado AV, Ferro JM, Gouveia Oliveira A: Long-term prognosis of first-ever lacunar strokes. a hospital-based study. Stroke 1996;27:661-666.
32.: Kay R, Wong KS, Perez G, Woo J: Dichotomizing stroke outcomes based on self-reported dependency. Neurology 1997;49:1694-1696.
33.: Kwiatkowski TG, Libman RB, Frankel M, Tilley BC, Morgenstern LB, Lu M, et al: Effects of tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischemic stroke at one year. N Engl J Med 1999;340:1781-1787.
34.: De Haan R, Limburg M, Bossuyt P, Van Der Meulen J, Aaronson N: The clinical meaning of Rankin 'handicap' grades after stroke. Stroke 1995;26:2027-2030.
35.: Samuelsson M, Söderfeldt B, Olsson GB: Functional outcome in patients with lacunar infarction. Stroke 1996;27:842-846.
36.: Adams GF: Grading of the functional recovery from strokes. Age Ageing 1975;4:137-141.
37.: Paciaroni M, Arnold P, Van Melle G, Bogousslavsky J: Severe disability at hospital discharge in ischaemic stroke survivors. Eur Neurol 2000;43:30-34.
38.: The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke rt-PA Stroke Study Group: Tissue plasminogen activator for acute ischaemic stroke. N Engl J Med 1995;333:1581-1587.
39.: The Multicenter Acute Stroke Trial Europe Study Group: Thrombolytic therapy with streptokinase in acute ischaemic stroke. N Engl J Med 1996;335:145-150.
40.: North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial Collaborators: Benefit of carotid endarterectomy in patients with symptomatic moderate or severe stenosis. N Engl J Med 1998;339:1415-1425.
41.: Brott T, Adams P, Olinger CP: Measurement of acute cerebral infarction: a clinical examination scale. Stroke 1989;20:864-870.
42.: Mahoney FI, Barthel BW: Functional evaluation: the Barthel index. Md Med J 1965;14:61-65.
43.: Wade DT, Collin C: The Barthel ADL index: a standard measure of physical disability? Int Disabil Studies 1988;10:64-67.
44.: Jennett B, Bond M: Assessment of outcome after severe brain damage. a practical scale. Lancet 1975;i:480-484.
45.: Jennett B, Snock J, Bond MR, Brooks N: Disability after severe head injury: observations on the use of the Glasgow Outcome Scale. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1981;44:285-293.
46.: Guyatt GH, Walter S, Norman G: Measuring change over time: assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments. J Chron Dis 1987;40:171-178.
47.: Guide for the Uniform Data Set for Medical Rehabilitation (including the FIM instrument), version 5.1. Buffalo, NY, State University of New York at Buffalo, 1997.
48.: Buchan AM, Barber PA, Newcommon N, Karbalai HG, Demchuk AM, Hoyte M, et al: Effectiveness of t-PA in acute ischemic stroke. Outcomes relates to appropriateness. Neurology 2000;54:679-684.
49.: Hacke W, Bluhmki E, Steiner T, Tatlisumak T, Mahangne M-H, Sacchetti M-L, et al: Dichotomized efficacy end points and global end-point analysis applied to the ECASS intention-to-treat data set: post hoc analysis of ECASS 1. Stroke 1998;29:2073-2075.
50.: Broderick JP, Lu M, Kothari R, Levine SR, Lyden PD, Haley EC, et al: Finding the most powerful measures of the effectiveness of tissue plasminogen activator in the NINDS tPA stroke trial. Stroke 2000;31:2335-2341.
51.: Candelise L, Pinardi G, Aritzu E, Musicco M: Telephone interview for stroke outcome assessment. Cerebrovasc Dis 1994;4:341-343.
52.: Kirshner B, Guyatt G: A methodological framework for assessing health indices. J Chron Dis 1985;38:27-36.
53.: Gresham GE, Duncan PW, Stason WB, Adams HP Jr, Adelman AM, Alexander DN, et al: Post-Stroke Rehabilitation. Clinical Practice Guideline, No 16, ed 1. Rockville, US Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Health Care Policy and Research. AHCPR publ No 95-0662, 1995.
54.: Korner-Bitensky N, Wood-Dauphinee S, Siemiatycki J, Shapiro S, Becker R: Health-related information postdischarge: telephone versus face-to-face interviewing. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1994;75:1287-1296.
55.: Shinar D, Gross CR, Bronstein KS, Licata-Gehr EE, Eden DT, Cabrera AR, et al: Reliability of the activities of daily living scale and its use in telephone interview. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1987;68:723-728.
56.: Knapp P, Hewison J: Disagreement in patient and carer assessment of functional abilities after stroke. Stroke 1999;30:934-938.
57.: Wyller TB, Sveen U, Bautz-Holter E: The Barthel ADL index one year after stroke: comparison between relatives' and occupational therapists' scores. Age Ageing 1995;24:389-401.
58.: Ranhoff AH, Laake K: The Barthel ADL index scoring by the physician from patient interview is not reliable. Age Ageing 1993;22:171-174.
59.: World Health Organization: International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps: A Manual of Classification Relating to the Consequences of Disease. Geneva, World Health Organization, 1980.
60.: Bloch RF: Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients (letter). Stroke 1988;19:1448.
61.: Burn JPS: Reliability of the Modified Rankin Scale (letter). Stroke 1992;23:438.
62.: Wade DT: Measurement in Neurological Rehabilitation. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1992.
63.: Bonita R: Epidemiology of stroke. Lancet 1992;339:342-347.
64.: Jadad A: Randomised Controlled Trials. London, BMJ Books, 1998.
65.: World Health Organization: ICIDH-2: International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Final draft. Geneva, WHO, 2001.

Author Contacts

Dr. Peter Wayne New
Rehabilitation and Aged Services Program
Kingston Center, Warrigal Rd.
Cheltenham, Vic. 3192 (Australia)
Tel. +61 3 9265 1000, Fax +61 3 9265 1430, E-Mail Peter.New@southernhealth.org.au

Article Information

Published online: November 3, 2005
Number of Print Pages : 12
Number of Figures : 0, Number of Tables : 7, Number of References : 65

Publication Details

Neuroepidemiology

Vol. 26, No. 1, Year 2006 (Cover Date: December 2005)

Journal Editor: Román, G.C. (San Antonio, Tex.)
ISSN: 0251-5350 (print), 1423-0208 (Online)

For additional information: http://www.karger.com/NED

Drug Dosage / Copyright

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 goverment 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. Copyright: 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 or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.

	© 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel
	Last update: 12/12/2005