Validity of the Utrecht scale for evaluation of rehabilitation-participation restrictions scale in a hospital-based stroke population 3 months after stroke

References

• Johnson CO, Nguyen M, Roth GA, et al. Global, regional, and national burden of stroke, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet Neurol. 2019;18(5):439–458.doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(19)30034-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health - ICF. Geneva: World Health Organization. ed.; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Katzan IL, Thompson NR, Lapin B, Uchino K. Added value of patient-reported outcome measures in stroke clinical practice. J Am Heart Assoc. 2017;6:7. doi:10.1161/JAHA.116.005356.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tarvonen-Schröder S, Hurme S, Laimi K. The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) and the WHO minimal generic set of domains of functioning and health versus conventional instruments in subacute stroke. J Rehabil Med. 2019;51(9):675–682. doi:10.2340/16501977-2583.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor-Rowan M, Wilson A, Dawson J, Quinn TJ. Functional assessment for acute stroke trials: properties, analysis, and application. Front Neurol. 2018;9:(MAR):1–10. doi:10.3389/fneur.2018.00191.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reeves M, Lisabeth L, Williams L, et al. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for acute stroke: rationale, methods and future directions. Stroke. 2018;49(6):1549–1556.doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.018912.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engel-Yeger B, Tse T, Josman N, Baum C, Carey LM. Scoping review: the trajectory of recovery of participation outcomes following stroke. Behav Neurol. 2018;2018:5472018. doi:10.1155/2018/5472018.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Der Zee CH, Kap A, Mishre RR, Schouten EJ, Post MWM. Responsiveness of four participation measures to changes during and after outpatient rehabilitation. J Rehabil Med. 2011;43(11):1003–1009. doi:10.2340/16501977-0879.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mol TI, van Bennekom CA, Schepers VP, et al. Differences in societal participation across diagnostic groups: secondary analyses of 8 studies using the utrecht scale for evaluation of rehabilitation-participation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. March 2021; Published online. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2021.02.024.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Domensino AF, Winkens I, JCM VH, Cam VB, Van Heugten CM. Defining the content of a minimal dataset for acquired brain injury using a Delphi procedure. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2020;18(1):1–10. doi:10.1186/s12955-020-01286-3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Groeneveld IF, Goossens PH, van Meijeren-Pont W, et al. Value-based stroke rehabilitation: feasibility and results of patient-reported outcome measures in the first year after stroke. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2019;28(2):499–512.doi:10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2018.10.033.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Post MWM, Van Der Zee CH, Hennink J, Schafrat CG, JMA V-M, Van Berlekom SB. Validity of the Utrecht scale for evaluation of rehabilitation-participation. Disabil Rehabil. 2012;34(6):478–485. doi:10.3109/09638288.2011.608148.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Der Zee CH, Post MW, Brinkhof MW, Wagenaar RC. Comparison of the Utrecht scale for evaluation of rehabilitation-participation with the ICF measure of participation and activities screener and the WHO disability assessment schedule ii in persons with spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2014;95(1):87–93. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2013.08.236.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mader L, Post M, Ballert C, Michel G, Stucki G, Brinkhof M. Metric properties of the Utrecht scale for evaluation of rehabilitation-participation (USER-Participation) in persons with spinal cord injury living in Switzerland. J Rehabil Med. 2016;48(2):165–174. doi:10.2340/16501977-2010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Der Zee CH, Baars-Elsinga A, JMA V-M, Post MWM. Responsiveness of two participation measures in an outpatient rehabilitation setting. Scand J Occup Ther. 2013;20(3):201–208. doi:10.3109/11038128.2012.754491.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janssen PM, Visser NA, Dorhout Mees SM, Klijn CJ, Algra A, Rinkel GJ. Comparison of telephone and face-to-face assessment of the modified Rankin Scale. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2010;29(2):137–139. doi:10.1159/000262309.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lam KH, Kwa VIH. Validity of the PROMIS-10 global health assessed by telephone and on paper in minor stroke and transient ischaemic attack in the Netherlands. BMJ Open. 2018;8:7. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019919.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chatterji R, Naylor JM, Harris IA, et al. An equivalence study: are patient-completed and telephone interview equivalent modes of administration for the EuroQol survey? Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2017. 15(1). 10.1186/s12955-017-0596-x.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kuhrij LS, Wouters MWJM, van den Berg-Vos RM, de Leeuw FE, Nederkoorn PJ. The Dutch acute stroke audit: benchmarking acute stroke care in the Netherlands. Eur Stroke J. 2018;3(4):361–368. doi:10.1177/2396987318787695.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Der Zee CH, JMA V-M, Lindeman E, Kappelle LJ, Post MWM. Participation in the chronic phase of stroke. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2013;20(1):52–61. doi:10.1310/tsr2001-52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Broderick JP, Adeoye O, Elm J. Evolution of the modified rankin scale and its use in future stroke trials. Stroke. 2017;48(7):2007–2012. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.017866.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Hout B, Janssen MF, Feng YS, et al. Interim scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L value sets. Value Health. 2012;15(5):708–715.doi:10.1016/j.jval.2012.02.008.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hunger M, Sabariego C, Stollenwerk B, Cieza A, Leidl R. Validity, reliability and responsiveness of the EQ-5D in German stroke patients undergoing rehabilitation. Qual Life Res. 2012;21(7):1205–1216. doi:10.1007/s11136-011-0024-3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janssen MF, Pickard AS, Golicki D, et al. Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-5L compared to the EQ-5D-3L across eight patient groups: a multi-country study. Qual Life Res. 2013;22(7):1717–1727.doi:10.1007/s11136-012-0322-4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Golicki D, Niewada M, Karlinska A, et al. Comparing responsiveness of the EQ-5D-5L, EQ-5D-3L and EQ VAS in stroke patients. Qual Life Res. 2015;24(6):1555–1563.doi:10.1007/s11136-014-0873-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Golicki D, Niewada M, Buczek J, et al. Validity of EQ-5D-5L in stroke. Qual Life Res. 2015;24(4):845–850.doi:10.1007/s11136-014-0834-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tucker CA, Escorpizo R, Cieza A, et al. Mapping the content of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS(R)) using the International Classification of Functioning, Health and Disability. Qual Life Res. 2014;23(9):2431–2438.doi:10.1007/s11136-014-0691-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barile JP, Reeve BB, Smith AW, et al. Monitoring population health for healthy people 2020: evaluation of the NIH PROMIS(R) global health, CDC healthy days, and satisfaction with life instruments. Qual Life Res. 2013;22(6):1201–1211.doi:10.1007/s11136-012-0246-z.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salinas J, Sprinkhuizen SM, Ackerson T, et al. An international standard set of patient-centered outcome measures after stroke. Stroke. 2016;47(1):180–186.doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.010898.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katzan IL, Lapin B. PROMIS GH (Patient-reported outcomes measurement information system global health) scale in stroke: a validation study. Stroke. 2018;49(1):147–154. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.018766.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katzan IL, Thompson N, Uchino K. Innovations in Stroke: the Use of PROMIS and NeuroQoL scales in clinical stroke trials. Stroke. 2016;47(2):e27–30. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.011377.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quinn TJ, Dawson J, Walters MR, Lees KR. Reliability of the modified Rankin Scale: a systematic review. Stroke. 2009;40(10):3393–3395. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.557256.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Banks JL, Marotta CA. Outcomes validity and reliability of the modified Rankin scale: implications for stroke clinical trials: a literature review and synthesis. Stroke. 2007;38(3):1091–1096. doi:10.1161/01.STR.0000258355.23810.c6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kasner SE. Clinical interpretation and use of stroke scales. Lancet Neurol. 2006;5(7):603–612. doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(06)70495-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hinkle JL. Reliability and validity of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale for neuroscience nurses. Stroke. 2014;45(3):e32–4. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.004243.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duffy L, Gajree S, Langhorne P, Stott DJ, Quinn TJ. Reliability (inter-rater agreement) of the Barthel Index for assessment of stroke survivors: systematic review and meta-analysis. Stroke. 2013;44(2):462–468. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.678615.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Terwee CB, Bot SDM, De Boer MR, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34–42.doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Streiner DL. Starting at the beginning: an introduction to coefficient alpha and internal consistency. J Pers Assess. 2003;80(1):99–103. doi:10.1207/S15327752JPA8001_18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd: Routledge (Psychology Press), Taylor & Francis Group, New York; 1988. 10.4324/9780203771587.
   Google Scholar
• Lakens D. Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: a practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Front Psychol. 2013;4(NOV). doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• de Graaf JA, van Mierlo ML, Post MWM, Achterberg WP, Kappelle LJ, Visser-Meily JMA. Long-term restrictions in participation in stroke survivors under and over 70 years of age. Disabil Rehabil. 2018;40(6):637–645. doi:10.1080/09638288.2016.1271466.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Price-Haywood EG, Harden-Barrios J, Carr C, Reddy L, Bazzano LA, van Driel ML. Patient-reported outcomes in stroke clinical trials 2002–2016: a systematic review. Qual Life Res. 2019;28(5):1119–1128. doi:10.1007/s11136-018-2053-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verberne DPJ, Post MWM, Köhler S, Carey LM, JMA V-M, van Heugten CM. Course of social participation in the first 2 years after stroke and its associations with demographic and stroke-related factors. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2018;32(9):821–833. doi:10.1177/1545968318796341.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar