Literature DB >> 20360551

Improving the reliability of stroke disability grading in clinical trials and clinical practice: the Rankin Focused Assessment (RFA).

Jeffrey L Saver1, Bogdan Filip, Scott Hamilton, Anna Yanes, Sharon Craig, Michelle Cho, Robin Conwit, Sidney Starkman.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: The modified Rankin Scale rates global disability after stroke and is the most comprehensive and widely used primary outcome measure in acute stroke trials. However, substantial interobserver variability in modified Rankin Scale scoring has been reported. This study sought to develop and validate a short, practicable structured assessment that would enhance interrater reliability.
METHODS: The Rankin Focused Assessment was developed by selecting and refining elements from prior instruments. The Rankin Focused Assessment takes 3 to 5 minutes to apply and provides clear, operationalized criteria to distinguish the 7 assignable global disability levels. The Rankin Focused Assessment was prospectively validated 3 months poststroke among 50 consecutive patients enrolled in the Phase 3 National Institutes of Health Field Administration of Stroke Therapy-Magnesium (FAST-MAG) Trial.
RESULTS: Among the 50 patients, mean age was 71.5 years (range, 43 to 93 years), 48% were female, and stroke subtype was hemorrhagic in 24%. At Day 90, 43 patients were alive and 7 had died. The modified Rankin Scale median was 2.0 and mean was 2.8. When pairs of 14 raters assessed all enrolled patients, the percent agreement was 94%, the weighted kappa was 0.99 (95% CI, 0.99 to 1.0), and the unweighted kappa was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.85 to 1.00). Among the 43 surviving patients, the percent agreement was 93%, the weighted kappa was 0.99 (0.98 to 1.0), and the unweighted kappa was 0.91 (0.82 to 1.00).
CONCLUSIONS: The Rankin Focused Assessment yields high interrater reliability in the grading of final global disability among consecutive patients with stroke participating in a randomized clinical trial. The Rankin Focused Assessment is brief and practical for use in multicenter clinical trials and quality improvement activities.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20360551      PMCID: PMC2930146          DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.571364

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stroke        ISSN: 0039-2499            Impact factor:   7.914


  14 in total

Review 1.  Outcome measures in acute stroke trials: a systematic review and some recommendations to improve practice.

Authors:  P W Duncan; H S Jorgensen; D T Wade
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 7.914

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

Authors:  J T Lindsay Wilson; Asha Hareendran; Marie Grant; Tracey Baird; Ursula G R Schulz; Keith W Muir; Ian Bone
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 7.914

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

Authors:  J RANKIN
Journal:  Scott Med J       Date:  1957-05       Impact factor: 0.729

4.  Critical appraisal and review of the Rankin scale and its derivatives.

Authors:  Peter Wayne New; Rachelle Buchbinder
Journal:  Neuroepidemiology       Date:  2005-11-03       Impact factor: 3.282

5.  Calculation of sample size for stroke trials assessing functional outcome: comparison of binary and ordinal approaches.

Authors: 
Journal:  Int J Stroke       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 5.266

6.  Variability in modified Rankin scoring across a large cohort of international observers.

Authors:  Terence J Quinn; Jesse Dawson; Matthew R Walters; Kennedy R Lees
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2008-08-07       Impact factor: 7.914

7.  Reliability of the modified Rankin Scale across multiple raters: benefits of a structured interview.

Authors:  J T Lindsay Wilson; Asha Hareendran; Anne Hendry; Jan Potter; Ian Bone; Keith W Muir
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2005-02-17       Impact factor: 7.914

Review 8.  Outcomes validity and reliability of the modified Rankin scale: implications for stroke clinical trials: a literature review and synthesis.

Authors:  Jamie L Banks; Charles A Marotta
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2007-02-01       Impact factor: 7.914

9.  Exploring the reliability of the modified rankin scale.

Authors:  Terence J Quinn; Jesse Dawson; Matthew R Walters; Kennedy R Lees
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2009-01-08       Impact factor: 7.914

10.  Initial experience of a digital training resource for modified Rankin scale assessment in clinical trials.

Authors:  Terence J Quinn; Kennedy R Lees; Hans-Goran Hardemark; Jesse Dawson; Matthew R Walters
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2007-06-28       Impact factor: 7.914

View more
  60 in total

1.  Dichotomous "Good Outcome" Indicates Mobility More Than Cognitive or Social Quality of Life.

Authors:  Andrew M Naidech; Jennifer L Beaumont; Michael Berman; Brandon Francis; Eric Liotta; Matthew B Maas; Shyam Prabhakaran; Jane Holl; David Cella
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 7.598

Review 2.  The prognostic value of motor-evoked potentials in motor recovery and functional outcome after stroke − a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Jan Pawel Bembenek; Katarzyna Kurczych; Michal Karli Nski; Anna Czlonkowska
Journal:  Funct Neurol       Date:  2012 Apr-Jun

3.  Day-7 or day-90 modified Rankin scale score: what is the best measure of outcome after thrombolysis in ischemic stroke?

Authors:  Jean-Marc Bugnicourt; Olivier Godefroy
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 4.  How to Measure Recovery? Revisiting Concepts and Methods for Stroke Studies.

Authors:  Marc Hommel; Olivier Detante; Isabelle Favre; Emmanuel Touzé; Assia Jaillard
Journal:  Transl Stroke Res       Date:  2016-08-08       Impact factor: 6.829

5.  Natural History of Infratentorial Intracerebral Hemorrhages: Two Subgroups with Distinct Presentations and Outcomes.

Authors:  Viren D Patel; Roxanna M Garcia; Dionne E Swor; Eric M Liotta; Matthew B Maas; Andrew Naidech
Journal:  J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis       Date:  2020-05-15       Impact factor: 2.136

Review 6.  Evolution of the Modified Rankin Scale and Its Use in Future Stroke Trials.

Authors:  Joseph P Broderick; Opeolu Adeoye; Jordan Elm
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2017-06-16       Impact factor: 7.914

7.  Methodology of the Field Administration of Stroke Therapy - Magnesium (FAST-MAG) phase 3 trial: Part 1 - rationale and general methods.

Authors:  Jeffrey L Saver; Sidney Starkman; Marc Eckstein; Samuel Stratton; Frank Pratt; Scott Hamilton; Robin Conwit; David S Liebeskind; Gene Sung; Nerses Sanossian
Journal:  Int J Stroke       Date:  2014-01-13       Impact factor: 5.266

8.  Predicting Domain-Specific Health-Related Quality of Life Using Acute Infarct Volume.

Authors:  Chen Lin; Jungwha Lee; Neil Chatterjee; Carlos Corado; Timothy Carroll; Andrew Naidech; Shyam Prabhakaran
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2017-05-23       Impact factor: 7.914

9.  Agitation, Delirium, and Cognitive Outcomes in Intracerebral Hemorrhage.

Authors:  Lisa J Rosenthal; Brandon A Francis; Jennifer L Beaumont; David Cella; Michael D Berman; Matthew B Maas; Eric M Liotta; Robert Askew; Andrew M Naidech
Journal:  Psychosomatics       Date:  2016-08-05       Impact factor: 2.386

10.  Identifying Performance Outliers for Stroke Care Based on Composite Score of Process Indicators: an Observational Study in China.

Authors:  Chao Wang; Shaofei Su; Xi Li; Jingkun Li; Xiaoqiang Bao; Meina Liu
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2020-05-27       Impact factor: 5.128

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.