Introduction: The modified Rankin scale (mRS) is the most common assessment tool for measuring overall functional outcome in stroke studies. The traditional way of using mRS face-to-face is time- and cost-consuming. The aim of this study was to test the validity of the Swedish translation of the simplified modified Rankin scale questionnaire (smRSq) as compared with the mRS assessed face-to-face 6 months after a stroke. Methods: Within the ongoing EFFECTS trial, smRSq was sent out to 108 consecutive stroke patients 6 months after a stroke. The majority, 90% (97/108), of the patients answered the questionnaire; for the remaining 10%, it was answered by the next of kin. The patients were assessed by face-to-face mRS by 7 certified healthcare professionals at 4 Swedish stroke centres. The primary outcome was assessed by Cohen’s kappa and weighted kappa. Results: There was good agreement between postal smRSq, answered by the patients, and the mRS face-to-face; Cohen’s kappa was 0.43 (CI 95% 0.31–0.55), weighted kappa was 0.64 (CI 95% 0.55–0.73), and Spearman rank correlation was 0.82 (p < 0.0001). In 55% (59/108), there was full agreement, and of the 49 patients not showing exact agreement, 44 patients differed by 1 grade and 5 patients had a difference of 2 grades. Discussion/Conclusion: Our results show good validity of the postal smRSq, answered by the patients, compared with the mRS carried out face-to-face at 6 months after a stroke. This result could help trialists in the future simplify study design and make multicentre trials and quality registers with a large number of patients more feasible and time-saving.

1.
Duncan
PW
,
Jorgensen
HS
,
Wade
DT
.
Outcome measures in acute stroke trials: a systematic review and some recommendations to improve practice
.
Stroke
.
2000
;
31
(
6
):
1429
38
.
2.
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
6
.
3.
Quinn
TJ
,
Dawson
J
,
Walters
MR
,
Lees
KR
.
Functional outcome measures in contemporary stroke trials
.
Int J Stroke
.
2009
;
4
(
3
):
200
5
.
4.
Eng
JJ
,
Bird
ML
,
Godecke
E
,
Hoffmann
TC
,
Laurin
C
,
Olaoye
OA
, et al
Moving stroke rehabilitation research evidence into clinical practice: consensus-based core recommendations from the stroke recovery and rehabilitation roundtable
.
Int J Stroke
.
2019
;
14
(
8
):
766
73
.
5.
McArthur
K
,
Fan
Y
,
Pei
Z
,
Quinn
T
.
Optimising outcome assessment to improve quality and efficiency of stroke trials
.
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res
.
2014
;
14
(
1
):
101
11
.
6.
Bruno
A
,
Shah
N
,
Lin
C
,
Close
B
,
Hess
DC
,
Davis
K
, et al
Improving modified rankin scale assessment with a simplified questionnaire
.
Stroke
.
2010
;
41
(
5
):
1048
50
.
7.
Bruno
A
,
Akinwuntan
AE
,
Lin
C
,
Close
B
,
Davis
K
,
Baute
V
, et al
Simplified modified rankin scale questionnaire: reproducibility over the telephone and validation with quality of life
.
Stroke
.
2011
;
42
(
8
):
2276
9
.
8.
Dennis
M
,
Mead
G
,
Doubal
F
,
Graham
C
.
Determining the modified rankin score after stroke by postal and telephone questionnaires
.
Stroke
.
2012
;
43
(
3
):
851
3
.
9.
Yuan
JL
,
Bruno
A
,
Li
T
,
Li
SJ
,
Zhang
XD
,
Li
HY
, et al
Replication and extension of the simplified modified rankin scale in 150 chinese stroke patients
.
Eur Neurol
.
2012
;
67
(
4
):
206
10
.
10.
Chen
X
,
Li
J
,
Anderson
CS
,
Lindley
RI
,
Hackett
ML
,
Robinson
T
, et al
Validation of the simplified modified rankin scale for stroke trials: experience from the enchanted alteplase-dose arm
.
Int J Stroke
.
2020
:
1747493019897858
.
11.
Quinn
TJ
,
Dawson
J
,
Walters
MR
,
Lees
KR
.
Reliability of the modified rankin scale: a systematic review
.
Stroke
.
2009
;
40
(
10
):
3393
5
.
12.
Treweek
S
,
Bevan
S
,
Bower
P
,
Campbell
M
,
Christie
J
,
Clarke
M
, et al
Trial forge guidance 1: what is a study within a trial (SWAT)?
Trials
.
2018
;
19
(
1
):
139
.
13.
Mead
G
,
Hackett
ML
,
Lundström
E
,
Murray
V
,
Hankey
GJ
,
Dennis
M
.
The focus, affinityand effectstrials studying the effect(s) of fluoxetine in patients with a recent stroke: a study protocol for three multicentre randomised controlled trials
.
Trials
.
2015
;
16
:
369
.
14.
HealthCarePoint Bb. BlueCloud by HealthCarePoint: [internet]. Texas: HealthCarePoint; 2020 [updated 2020; cited 2018 01 Feb]. Available from: https://www.healthcarepoint.com/
.
15.
Duncan
PW
,
Wallace
D
,
Lai
SM
,
Johnson
D
,
Embretson
S
,
Laster
LJ
.
The stroke impact scale version 2.0. Evaluation of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change
.
Stroke
.
1999
;
30
(
10
):
2131
40
.
16.
Cohen
J
.
Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit
.
Psychol Bull
.
1968
;
70
(
4
):
213
20
.
17.
Brennan
P
,
Silman
A
.
Statistical methods for assessing observer variability in clinical measures
.
Bmj
.
1992
;
304
(
6840
):
1491
4
.
18.
SWAT store: The Northern Ireland network for trials methodology research. Identifying opinions on the features needed for making a study successful SWAT64: Queen’s University Belfast; [cited 2020 July 07]. Available from
: https://www.qub.ac.uk/sites/TheNorthernIrelandNetworkforTrialsMethodologyResearch/SWATSWARInformation/Repositories/SWATStore/.
19.
register RTSS. Riksstroke [internet] Umeå: Registercentrum Norr; 2020 [updated 27 Sep 2019; cited 2020 Jan 29]. Available from
: http://www.riksstroke.org/eng/.
20.
van Swieten
JC
,
Koudstaal
PJ
,
Visser
MC
,
Schouten
HJ
,
van Gijn
J
.
Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients
.
Stroke
.
1988
;
19
(
5
):
604
7
.
21.
Wilson
JT
,
Hareendran
A
,
Hendry
A
,
Potter
J
,
Bone
I
,
Muir
KW
.
Reliability of the modified rankin scale across multiple raters: benefits of a structured interview
.
Stroke
.
2005
;
36
(
4
):
777
81
.
22.
Quinn
TJ
,
Dawson
J
,
Walters
MR
,
Lees
KR
.
Exploring the reliability of the modified rankin scale
.
Stroke
.
2009
;
40
(
3
):
762
6
.
23.
Chen
MH
,
Hsieh
CL
,
Mao
HF
,
Huang
SL
.
Differences between patient and proxy reports in the assessment of disability after stroke
.
Clin Rehabil
.
2007
;
21
(
4
):
351
6
.
24.
Oczkowski
C
,
O’Donnell
M
.
Reliability of proxy respondents for patients with stroke: a systematic review
.
J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis
.
2010
;
19
(
5
):
410
6
.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.