Literature DB >> 35277444

Association of Modified Rankin Scale With Recovery Phenotypes in Patients With Upper Extremity Weakness After Stroke.

Kimberly S Erler1, Rui Wu1, Julie A DiCarlo1, Marina F Petrilli1, Perman Gochyyev1, Leigh R Hochberg1, Steven A Kautz1, Lee H Schwamm1, Steven C Cramer1, Seth P Finklestein1, David J Lin1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Precise measurement of outcomes is essential for stroke trials and clinical care. Prior research has highlighted conceptual differences between global outcome measures such as the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and domain-specific measures (e.g., motor, sensory, language or cognitive function). This study related motor phenotypes to the mRS, specifically aiming to determine whether mRS levels distinguish motor impairment and function phenotypes, and to compare mRS outcomes to meaningful changes in impairment and function from acute to subacute recovery after stroke.
METHODS: Patients with upper extremity weakness after ischemic stroke were assessed with a battery of impairment and functional measures within the first week and at 90 days after stroke. Impairment and functional outcomes were examined in relation to 90-day mRS scores. Clinically meaningful changes in motor impairment, activities of daily living, and mobility were examined in relation to 90-day mRS score.
RESULTS: In this cohort of 73 patients with stroke, impairment and functional outcomes were associated with 90-day mRS scores but showed substantial variability within individual mRS levels: within mRS level 2, upper extremity impairment ranged from near hemiplegia (with an upper extremity Fugl-Meyer score 8) to no deficits (upper extremity Fugl-Meyer score 66). Overall, there were few differences in impairment and functional outcomes between adjacent mRS levels. While some outcome measures were significantly different between mRS levels 3 and 4 (Nine-Hole Peg, Leg Motor, gait velocity, Timed Up and Go, NIH Stroke Scale, and Barthel Index), none of the outcome measures differed between mRS levels 1 and 2. Fugl-Meyer and grip strength were not different between any adjacent mRS levels. A substantial number of patients experienced clinically meaningful changes in impairment and function in the first 90 days after stroke but did not achieve good mRS outcome (mRS score ≤ 2). DISCUSSION: The mRS broadly relates to domain-specific outcomes after stroke, confirming its established value in stroke trials, but it does not precisely distinguish differences in impairment and function, nor does it sufficiently capture meaningful clinical changes across impairment, activities of daily living status, and mobility. These findings underscore the potential utility of incorporating detailed phenotypic measures along with the mRS in future stroke trials.
© 2022 American Academy of Neurology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35277444      PMCID: PMC9109148          DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000200154

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurology        ISSN: 0028-3878            Impact factor:   11.800


  39 in total

1.  Effect of levodopa in combination with physiotherapy on functional motor recovery after stroke: a prospective, randomised, double-blind study.

Authors:  K Scheidtmann; W Fries; F Müller; E Koenig
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2001-09-08       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Establishing the minimal clinically important difference of the Barthel Index in stroke patients.

Authors:  Yu-Wei Hsieh; Chun-Hou Wang; Shwu-Chong Wu; Pau-Chung Chen; Ching-Fan Sheu; Ching-Lin Hsieh
Journal:  Neurorehabil Neural Repair       Date:  2007-03-09       Impact factor: 3.919

3.  Improving the sensitivity of the Barthel Index for stroke rehabilitation.

Authors:  S Shah; F Vanclay; B Cooper
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 6.437

4.  Subjective well-being one year after stroke.

Authors:  T B Wyller; U Sveen; K M Sødring; A M Pettersen; E Bautz-Holter
Journal:  Clin Rehabil       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 3.477

5.  Agreed definitions and a shared vision for new standards in stroke recovery research: The Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable taskforce.

Authors:  Julie Bernhardt; Kathryn S Hayward; Gert Kwakkel; Nick S Ward; Steven L Wolf; Karen Borschmann; John W Krakauer; Lara A Boyd; S Thomas Carmichael; Dale Corbett; Steven C Cramer
Journal:  Int J Stroke       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 5.266

6.  Refining endpoints for stroke recovery trials.

Authors:  Dirk M Hermann; Claudio L Bassetti; Ute Marx; Marie-Laure Audoli-Inthavong; Hugues Chabriat
Journal:  Lancet Neurol       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 44.182

7.  Validating and comparing stroke prognosis scales.

Authors:  Terence J Quinn; Sarjit Singh; Kennedy R Lees; Philip M Bath; Phyo K Myint
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2017-08-09       Impact factor: 9.910

8.  Stroke: working toward a prioritized world agenda.

Authors:  Vladimir Hachinski; Geoffrey A Donnan; Philip B Gorelick; Werner Hacke; Steven C Cramer; Markku Kaste; Marc Fisher; Michael Brainin; Alastair M Buchan; Eng H Lo; Brett E Skolnick; Karen L Furie; Graeme J Hankey; Miia Kivipelto; John Morris; Peter M Rothwell; Ralph L Sacco; Sidney C Smith; Yulun Wang; Alan Bryer; Gary A Ford; Costantino Iadecola; Sheila C O Martins; Jeff Saver; Veronika Skvortsova; Mark Bayley; Martin M Bednar; Pamela Duncan; Lori Enney; Seth Finklestein; Theresa A Jones; Lalit Kalra; Jeff Kleim; Ralph Nitkin; Robert Teasell; Cornelius Weiller; Bhupat Desai; Mark P Goldberg; Wolf-Dieter Heiss; Osmo Saarelma; Lee H Schwamm; Yukito Shinohara; Bhargava Trivedi; Nils Wahlgren; Lawrence K Wong; Antoine Hakim; Bo Norrving; Stephen Prudhomme; Natan M Bornstein; Stephen M Davis; Larry B Goldstein; Didier Leys; Jaakko Tuomilehto
Journal:  Cerebrovasc Dis       Date:  2010-05-24       Impact factor: 2.762

9.  Standardized Measurement of Quality of Upper Limb Movement After Stroke: Consensus-Based Core Recommendations From the Second Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable.

Authors:  G Kwakkel; E E H van Wegen; J H Burridge; C J Winstein; L E H van Dokkum; M Alt Murphy; M F Levin; J W Krakauer
Journal:  Neurorehabil Neural Repair       Date:  2019-10-29       Impact factor: 3.919

10.  Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance.

Authors:  Peter Craig; Paul Dieppe; Sally Macintyre; Susan Michie; Irwin Nazareth; Mark Petticrew
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2008-09-29
View more
  1 in total

1.  Deep profiling of multiple ischemic lesions in a large, multi-center cohort: Frequency, spatial distribution, and associations to clinical characteristics.

Authors:  Anna K Bonkhoff; Teresa Ullberg; Martin Bretzner; Sungmin Hong; Markus D Schirmer; Robert W Regenhardt; Kathleen L Donahue; Marco J Nardin; Adrian V Dalca; Anne-Katrin Giese; Mark R Etherton; Brandon L Hancock; Steven J T Mocking; Elissa C McIntosh; John Attia; John W Cole; Amanda Donatti; Christoph J Griessenauer; Laura Heitsch; Lukas Holmegaard; Katarina Jood; Jordi Jimenez-Conde; Steven J Kittner; Robin Lemmens; Christopher R Levi; Caitrin W McDonough; James F Meschia; Chia-Ling Phuah; Stefan Ropele; Jonathan Rosand; Jaume Roquer; Tatjana Rundek; Ralph L Sacco; Reinhold Schmidt; Pankaj Sharma; Agnieszka Slowik; Alessandro Sousa; Tara M Stanne; Daniel Strbian; Turgut Tatlisumak; Vincent Thijs; Achala Vagal; Daniel Woo; Ramin Zand; Patrick F McArdle; Bradford B Worrall; Christina Jern; Arne G Lindgren; Jane Maguire; Ona Wu; Petrea Frid; Natalia S Rost; Johan Wasselius
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2022-08-25       Impact factor: 5.152

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.