Monitoring the functional health status of stroke patients: the value of the Stroke-Adapted Sickness Impact Profile-30

References

• Bergner M, Bobbitt RA, Carter WB, Gilson BS. The Sickness Impact Profile: development and final revision of a health status measure. Medical Care 1981; 19: 787– 805.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Bruin AF, de Witte LP, Stevens FCJ, Diederiks JPM. Sickness Impact Profile: the state of the art of a generic functional status measure. Social Science and Medicine 1992; 35: 1008– 1014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Post MW, de Bruin AF, de Witte LP, Schrijvers A. The SIP68: a measure of health-related functional status in rehabilitation medicine. Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation 1996; 77: 440– 445.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Bruin AF, Diederiks JPM, de Witte LP, Stevens FCJ, Philipsen
   Google Scholar
• H. The development of a short generic version of the sickness impact profile. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1994; 47: 407– 418.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs HM, Touw-Otten FW, de Melker RA. The evaluation of changes in functional health status in patients with abdominal complaints. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1996; 49: 163– 171.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nydevik I, Hulter-Asberg K. Subjective dysfunction after stroke. A study with sickness impact profile. Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care 1991; 9: 271– 275.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jacobs HM, Luttink A, Touw-Otten FWMM, de Melker RA. The Sickness Impact Profile; results of an evaluation study of the Dutch version. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde 2002; 134: 1950–1954.
   Google Scholar
• de Haan RJ, Aaronson N, Limburg M, Hewer RL, van Crevel H. Measuring quality of life in stroke. Stroke 1993; 24: 320– 327.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Bruin AF, Buys M, de Witte LP, Diederiks JPM. The sickness impact profile: SIP68, a short generic version. First evaluation of the reliability and reproducibility. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1994; 47: 863– 871.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Straten A, de Haan RJ, Limburg M, Schuling J, Bossuyt PM, Van den Bos GA. A stroke-adapted 30-item version of the Sickness Impact Profile to assess quality of life (SA-SIP30). Stroke 1997; 28: 2155– 2161.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Straten A, Reitsma JB, Limburg M, Van den Bos GA, de Haan RJ. Impact of stroke type on survival and functional health. Cerebrovascular Diseases 2001; 12: 27– 33.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H. De Bruin AF, Diederiks JPM, de Witte LP, Stevens FCJ, PhilipsenSIP68: a shortened version of the Sickness Impact Profile. Maastricht, University of Limburg, Dept Medical Sociology, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales. A practical guide to their development and use. New York: Oxford University Press Inc., 1995.
   Google Scholar
• Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, Gladman DD. Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2000; 53: 459– 468.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Bennekom CA, Jelles F, Lankhorst GJ, Bouter LM. Responsiveness of the rehabilitation activities profile and the Barthel index. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1996; 49: 39– 44.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic Press, 1977.
   Google Scholar
• Van Straten A, de Haan RJ, Limburg M, van den Bos GA. Clinical meaning of the Stroke-Adapted Sickness Impact Profile-30 and the Sickness Impact Profile-136. Stroke 2000; 31: 2610– 2615.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Haan RJ, Limburg M, van der Meulen JH, Jacobs HM, Aaronson NK. Quality of life after stroke. Impact of stroke type and lesion location. Stroke 1995; 26: 402– 408.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H. De Bruin AF, Diederiks JPM, de Witte LP, Stevens FC, PhilipsenAssessing the responsiveness of a functional status measure: the Sickness Impact Profile versus the SIP68. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1997; 50: 529– 540.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liang MH. Longitudinal construct validity: establishment of clinical meaning in patient evaluative instruments. Medical Care 2000; 38: II84–II90.
   Google Scholar
• Buck D, Jacoby A, Massey A, Ford G. Evaluation of measures used to assess quality of life after stroke. Stroke 2000; 31: 2004– 2010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schuling J, Greidanus J, Meyboom-de Jong B. Measuring functional status of stroke patients with the Sickness Impact Profile. Disability & Rehabilitation 1993; 15: 19– 23.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• MacKenzie CR, Charlson ME, DiGioia D, Kelley K. Can the Sickness Impact Profile measure change? An example of scale assessment. Journal of Chronic Diseases 1986; 39: 429– 438.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mackenzie AE, Chang AM. Predictors of quality of life following stroke. Disability & Rehabilitation 2002; 24: 259– 265.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sneeuw KC, Aaronson NK, de Haan RJ, Limburg M. Assessing quality of life after stroke. The value and limitations of proxy ratings. Stroke 1997; 28: 1541– 1549.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tooth LR, McKenna KT, Smith M, O’Rourke P. Further evidence for the agreement between patients with stroke and their proxies on the Frenchay Activities Index. Clinical Rehabilitation 2003; 17: 656– 665.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Segal ME, Schall RR. Determining functional/health status and its relation to disability in stroke survivors. Stroke 1994; 25: 2391– 2397.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar