PURPOSE: The present study aimed to measure the internal consistency, inter-rater-reliability and validity of the World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule II (WHODAS II) for its application to stroke patients and their closest others. METHOD: Patients were assessed 6 months and 1 year after stroke with the self- and proxy-rating versions of the WHODAS II. The modified Rankin Scale (mRS) as well as patients' statements about 'Recovery' and 'Independence' were used as measurements for validity. Patients' statements concerning individual restrictions and limitations were compared with the WHODAS II items. RESULTS: Internal consistency can be regarded as good to excellent, inter-rater-reliability as satisfactory to good. Item reliability ranged from insufficient to good, the percentage of agreements was below 80%. WHODAS II scale scores of patients with an mRS score of 0 as well as of recovered and independent patients differed significantly from others. Correlation coefficients between WHODAS II Scales and validation measures ranged from fair to high. Correspondence between stroke related problems and WHODAS II items was good. CONCLUSION: The WHODAS II is a valid, generally reliable and useful instrument for the assessment of stroke patients over the first year after stroke.
PURPOSE: The present study aimed to measure the internal consistency, inter-rater-reliability and validity of the World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule II (WHODAS II) for its application to strokepatients and their closest others. METHOD:Patients were assessed 6 months and 1 year after stroke with the self- and proxy-rating versions of the WHODAS II. The modified Rankin Scale (mRS) as well as patients' statements about 'Recovery' and 'Independence' were used as measurements for validity. Patients' statements concerning individual restrictions and limitations were compared with the WHODAS II items. RESULTS: Internal consistency can be regarded as good to excellent, inter-rater-reliability as satisfactory to good. Item reliability ranged from insufficient to good, the percentage of agreements was below 80%. WHODAS II scale scores of patients with an mRS score of 0 as well as of recovered and independent patients differed significantly from others. Correlation coefficients between WHODAS II Scales and validation measures ranged from fair to high. Correspondence between stroke related problems and WHODAS II items was good. CONCLUSION: The WHODAS II is a valid, generally reliable and useful instrument for the assessment of strokepatients over the first year after stroke.
Authors: Noelle E Carlozzi; Anna L Kratz; Nancy R Downing; Siera Goodnight; Jennifer A Miner; Nicholas Migliore; Jane S Paulsen Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2015-01-31 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Carol L Hodgson; Andrew A Udy; Michael Bailey; Jonathan Barrett; Rinaldo Bellomo; Tracey Bucknall; Belinda J Gabbe; Alisa M Higgins; Theodore J Iwashyna; Julian Hunt-Smith; Lynne J Murray; Paul S Myles; Jennie Ponsford; David Pilcher; Craig Walker; Meredith Young; D J Cooper Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2017-05-22 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Patricia A Areán; Patrick J Raue; Charles McCulloch; Dora Kanellopoulos; Joanna K Seirup; Samprit Banerjee; Dimitris N Kiosses; Eleanor Dwyer; George S Alexopoulos Journal: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2015-04-24 Impact factor: 4.105
Authors: Leslie Mawuli Aglanu; John Humphrey Amuasi; Bob A Schut; Jonathan Steinhorst; Alexis Beyuo; Chrisantus Danaah Dari; Melvin Katey Agbogbatey; Emmanuel Steve Blankson; Damien Punguyire; David G Lalloo; Jörg Blessmann; Kabiru Mohammed Abass; Robert A Harrison; Ymkje Stienstra Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis Date: 2022-05-23
Authors: Brittany R Lapin; Nicolas R Thompson; Andrew Schuster; Ryan Honomichl; Irene L Katzan Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2021-01-28 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Bradley Brossman; Janet K Williams; Nancy Downing; James A Mills; Jane S Paulsen Journal: J Occup Environ Med Date: 2012-10 Impact factor: 2.162