Development of a Self-Report Scale of Spasticity

REFERENCES

• Lance JW. What is spasticity. Lancet. 1994;1:606.
   Google Scholar
• Sommerfeld DK, Gripenstedt U, Welmer A-K. Spasticity after stroke: An overview of prevalence, test instruments, and treatments [review]. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;91:814–820.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhimani RH, Anderson LC, Henly SJ, Stoddard SA. Clinical measurement of limb spasticity in adults: State of the science. J Neurosci Nurs. 2011;43: 104–115.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naghdi S, Ebrahimi I, Asgari A, et al. A preliminary study into the criterion validity of the Modified Modified Ashworth Scale using the new measure of the alpha motoneuron excitability in spastic hemiplegia. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol. 2007;47:187–192.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fleuren JF, Voerman GE, Erren-Wolters CV, et al. Stop using the Ashworth Scale for the assessment of spasticity. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2010;81:46–52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hobart JC, Riazi A, Thompson AJ, et al. Getting the measure of spasticity in multiple sclerosis: The Multiple Sclerosis Spasticity Scale (MSSS-88). Brain. 2006;129:224–234.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anwar K, Barnes MR A pilot study of a comparison between a patient scored numeric rating scale and clinician scored measures of spasticity in multiple sclerosis. NeuroRehabilitation. 2009;24(4): 333–340.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merbitz C, Morris J, Grip JC. Ordinal scales and foundations of misinference. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1989:70:308–312.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svensson E. Guidelines to statistical evaluation of data from rating scales and questionnaires. J Rehabil Med. 2001;33:47–48.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farrar JT, Troxel AB, Stott C, Duncombe P, Jensen MP. Validity, reliability, and clinical importance of change in a 0-10 numeric rating scale measure of spasticity: A post hoc analysis of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Clin Ther. 2008;30(5):974–985.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barker S, Kent RM, Tennant A. Quality of life after stroke: The development of a needs based quality of life scale, the stroke-QoL. Clin Rehabil. 2007;22:667.
   Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. Research Design: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Geddes J, Fear J, Pickering A, Tennant A, Hillman M, Chamberlain MA. Epidemiology of stroke in Northern England. J Epidemiol Commun Health. 1996;50:140–143.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rasch G. Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1960.
   Google Scholar
• Pallant JF, Tennant A. An introduction to the Rasch measurement model: An example using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Br J Clin Psychol. 2007;46:1–18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tennant A, Conaghan PG. The Rasch measurement model in rheumatology: What is it and why use it? When should it be applied, and what should one look for in a Rasch paper? Arthritis Rheum. 2007;57(8):1358–1362.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luce RD, Tukey JW. Simultaneous conjoint measurement: A new type of fundamental measurement. J Math Psychol. 1964;1:1–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Newby A, Conner GR, Bunderson CV. The Rasch model and additive conjoint measurement. J Appl Measure. 2009;10:348–354.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Andrich D, Sheridan BED, Luo G. RUMM2030: Rasch Unidimensional Models for Measurement. Perth, Western Australia: RUMM Laboratory; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Smith EV. Detecting and evaluation the impact of multidimensionality using item fit statistics and principal component analysis of residuals. J Appl Measure. 2002;3:205–231.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mahoney Fl, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: The Barthel Index. Md State Med J. 1965;14:61–65.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gompertz P, Pound P, Ebrahim S. A postal version of the Barthel Index. Clin Rehabil. 1994 8: 233–239.
   Google Scholar
• Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996;34:220-233.
   Google Scholar
• Hurst NP, Ruta DA, Kind R Comparison of the MOS short form-12 (SF12) health status questionnaire with the SF36 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Br J Rheumatol. 1998;37(8):862–869.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Okonkwo OC, Roth DL, Pulley L, Howard G. Confirmatory factor analysis of the validity of the SF-12 for persons with and without a history of stroke. Qual Life Res. 2010;19(9):1323–1331.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harwood RH, Rogers A, Dickinson E, Ebrahim S. Measuring handicap: The London Handicap Scale, a new outcome measure for chronic disease. Qual Health Care. 1994;3(1):11–6.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICE). Geneva: WHO; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps. Geneva: Author; 1980.
   Google Scholar
• Harwood RH, Gompertz P, Ebrahim S. Handicap one year after a stroke: Validity of a new scale. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1994;57(7):825–829.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linacre JM. Sample size and item calibration stability. Rasch Measure Trans. 1994;7(4):328–331.
   Google Scholar
• US Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for Industry. Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling Claims. Rockville, MD: FDA; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Rasch G. On general laws and the meaning of measurement in psychology. In: Neyman J, ed. Proceedings of the Fourth Berkeley Symposium on Mathematical Statistics and Probability. IV (pp 321–334). Berkeley: University of California Press; 1961.
   Google Scholar