Agreement between patients and nurses of neurobehavioral disability following stroke in an inpatient rehabilitation setting

References

• Lincoln NB, Kneebone II, Macniven JAB, et al. Psychological management of stroke. UK: Wiley-Blackwell; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Patel MD, Coshall C, Rudd AG, et al. Cognitive impairment after stroke: clinical determinants and its associations with long-term stroke outcomes. J Am Geriatric Soc. 2002;50:700–706.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood RL, Alderman N, Williams C. Assessment of neurobehavioural disability: a review of existing measures and recommendations for a comprehensive assessment tool. Brain Inj. 2008;22:905–918.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ashman TA, Gordon WA, Cantor JB, et al. Neurobehavioral consequences of traumatic brain injury. Mt Sinai J Med. 2006;73:999–1005.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood RL. Recognising and assessing neurobehavioral disability after traumatic brain injury. NeuroRehabilitation. 2013;32:699–706.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cerejeira J, Lagarto L, Mukaetova-Ladinska EB. Behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia. Front Neurol. 2012;3:73.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cipriani G, Vedovello M, Nuti A, et al. Aggressive behavior in patients with dementia: correlates and management. Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2011;11:408–413.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ornstein K, Gaugler JE. The problem with “problem behaviors”: a systematic review of the association between individual patient behavioral and psychological symptoms and caregiver depression and burden within the dementia patient-caregiver dyad. Int Psychogeriatr. 2012;24:1536–1552.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caeiro L, Ferro J, Figueira M. Apathy in acute stroke patients. Eur J Neurol. 2012;19:291–297.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghika-Schmid F, van Melle G, Guex P, et al. Subjective experience and behaviour in acute stroke: the Lausanne Emotion in Acute Stroke Study. [Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov’t]. Neurology. 1999;52:22–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hochstenbach J, Prigatano G, Mulder T. Patients' and relatives' reports of disturbances 9 months after stroke: subjective changes in physical functioning, cognition, emotion, and behavior. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86:1587–1593.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Starkstein S, Jorge RE, Robinson RG. The frequency, clinical correlates, and mechanism of anosognosia after stroke. Can J Psychiatr. 2010;55:355–361.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alderman N, Wood RL, Williams C. The development of the St Andrew's-Swansea Neurobehavioural Outcome Scale: validity and reliability of a new measure of neurobehavioural disability and social handicap. Brain Inj. 2011;25:83–100.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stolwyk RJ, O’Connell E, Lawson DW, et al. Neurobehavioral disability in stroke patients during subacute inpatient rehabilitation: prevalence and biopsychosocial associations. Topics Stroke Rehab. 2018;25:527–534.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duncan PW, Lai SM, Tyler D, et al. Evaluation of proxy responses to the Stroke Impact Scale. Stroke. Stroke 2002;33:2593–2599.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gauggel S, Heinemann AW, Böcker M, et al. Patient-staff agreement on Barthel Index Scores at admission and discharge in a sample of elderly stroke patients. Rehabil Psychol. 2004;49:21–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hilari K, Owen S, Farrelly SJ. Proxy and self-report agreement on the Stroke and Aphasia Quality of Life Scale-39. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2007;78:1072–1075.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poulin V, Desrosiers J. Participation after stroke: comparing proxies' and patients' perceptions. J Rehabil Med. 2008;40:28–35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams LS, Bakas T, Brizendine E, et al. How valid are family proxy assessments of stroke patients' health-related quality of life? Stroke. 2006;37:2081–2085.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Visser-Keizer AC, Meyboom-de Jong BJ, Deelman BG, et al. Subjective changes in emotion, cognition and behaviour after stroke: factors affecting the perception of patients and partners. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2002;24:1032–1045.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noé E, Ferri J, Caballero MC, et al. Self-awareness after acquired brain injury. Predictors and rehabilitation. J Neurol. 2005;252:168–175.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prigitano G. Anosognosia and patterns of impaired self-awareness observed in clinical practice. Cortex. 2014;61:81–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winkens I, Van Heugten CM, Visser-Meily JMA, et al. Impaired self-awareness after acquired brain injury: clinicians’ ratings: on its assessment and importance for rehabilitation. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2014;29:153–156.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winter L, Moriarty H, Robinson KM, et al. Rating competency in everyday activities in patients with TBI: clinical insights from a close look at patient-family differences. Disab Rehab. 2016;38:1280–1290.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bendz M. The first year of rehabilitation after a stroke–from two perspectives. Scand J Car Sci. 2003;17:215–222.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tooth LR, McKenna KT, Smith M, et al. Further evidence for the agreement between patients with stroke and their proxies on the Frenchay Activities Index. Clin Rehabil. 2003;17:656–665.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wyller TB, Sveen U, Bautz-Holter E. The Barthel ADL Index one year after stroke: comparison between relatives' and occupational therapist's scores. Age Ageing. 1995;24:398–401.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bjorkdahl A, Lundgren-Nilsson A, Sunnerhagen KS. How can we tell who is aware? Where does the veracity lie? J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2012;21:812–818.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cusick CP, Gerhart KA, Mellick DC. Participant-proxy reliability in traumatic brain injury outcome research. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2000;15:739–749.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klinedinst NJ, Clark PC, Blanton S, et al. Congruence of depressive symptom appraisal between persons with stroke and their caregivers. Rehabil Psychol. 2007;52:215–225.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reiseberg B, Borenstein J, Franssen E, et al. BEHAVE-AD: a clinical rating scale for the assessment of pharmacologically remediable behavioural symptomatology in Alzheimer’s Disease. In: Altman HJ, editor. Alzheimer’s disease: problems, prospects and perspectives. Boston, MA: Springer; 1987.
   Google Scholar
• Bamford J, Sandercock P, Dennis M, et al. Classification and natural history of clinically identifiable subtypes of cerebral infarction. Lancet. 1991;337:1521–1526.22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brott T, Adams HP, Jr Olinger CP, et al. Measurements of acute cerebral infarction: a clinical examination scale. Stroke. 1989;20:964–970.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keith RA, Granger CV, Hamilton BB, et al. The functional independence measure: a new tool for rehabilitation. In: Advances in clinical rehabilitation. New York (NY): Springer; 1987. p. 6–18.
   Google Scholar
• Nasreddine ZS, Phillips NA, Bédirian V, et al. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA): a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. Am J Geriatr Soc. 2005;53:695–699.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cumming TB, Bernhardt JB, Linden T. The Montreal cognitive assessment. Short cognitive evaluation in a large stroke trial. Stroke. 2011;42:2642–2644.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stolwyk R, O’Neill MH, McKay ADJ, et al. Are cognitive screensing tools sensitive and specific enough for use after stroke? A systematic literature review. Stroke 2014;45:3129–3134.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1983;67:361–370.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cicchetti DV. Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardised assessment instruments in psychology. Psychol Assess. 1994;6:284–290.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum; 1988.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas. 1960;20:37–46.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holm S, Schonberger M, Poulsen I, et al. Patients’ and relatives’ experience of difficulties following severe traumatic brain injury: the subacute stage. Neuropsychol Rehab. 2009;19:444–460.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al Banna M, Redha NA, Abdulla F, et al. Metacognition function poststroke: a review of definition and assessment. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatr. 2016;87:161–166.
   Google Scholar
• Feinstein AR, Cicchetti DV. High agreement but low kappa: I. The problems of two paradoxes. J Clin Epidemiol. 1990;43:543–549.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viera A, Garrett JM. Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic. Fam Med. 2005;37:360–363.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Stroke Foundation. Clinical guidelines for stroke management. Melbourne: NSF; 2010.
   Google Scholar