The Stroke Impact Scale Version 2.0
- 1 October 1999
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Stroke
- Vol. 30 (10) , 2131-2140
- https://doi.org/10.1161/01.str.30.10.2131
Abstract
Background and Purpose —To be useful for clinical research, an outcome measure must be feasible to administer and have sound psychometric attributes, including reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. This study characterizes the psychometric properties of the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS) Version 2.0. Methods —Version 2.0 of the SIS is a self-report measure that includes 64 items and assesses 8 domains (strength, hand function, ADL/IADL, mobility, communication, emotion, memory and thinking, and participation). Subjects with mild and moderate strokes completed the SIS at 1 month (n=91), at 3 months (n=80), and at 6 months after stroke (n=69). Twenty-five subjects had a replicate administration of the SIS 1 week after the 3-month or 6-month test. We evaluated internal consistency and test-retest reliability. The validity of the SIS domains was examined by comparing the SIS to existing stroke measures and by comparing differences in SIS scores across Rankin scale levels. The mixed model procedure was used to evaluate responsiveness of the SIS domain scores to change. Results —Each of the 8 domains met or approached the standard of 0.9 α-coefficient for comparing the same patients across time. The intraclass correlation coefficients for test-retest reliability of SIS domains ranged from 0.70 to 0.92, except for the emotion domain (0.57). When the domains were compared with established outcome measures, the correlations were moderate to strong (0.44 to 0.84). The participation domain was most strongly associated with SF-36 social role function. SIS domain scores discriminated across 4 Rankin levels. SIS domains are responsive to change due to ongoing recovery. Responsiveness to change is affected by stroke severity and time since stroke. Conclusions —This new, stroke-specific outcome measure is reliable, valid, and sensitive to change. We are optimistic about the utility of measure. More studies are required to evaluate the SIS in larger and more heterogeneous populations and to evaluate the feasibility and validity of proxy responses for the most severely impaired patients.Keywords
This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- Utilities for major stroke: Results from a survey of preferences among persons at increased risk for strokeAmerican Heart Journal, 1998
- Evaluating neurological outcome measures: the bare essentials.Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry, 1996
- Outcome and time course of recovery in stroke. Part II: Time course of recovery. The copenhagen stroke studyArchives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 1995
- Outcome and time course of recovery in stroke. Part I: Outcome. The Copenhagen stroke studyArchives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 1995
- The MOS 36-ltem Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): III. Tests of Data Quality, Scaling Assumptions, and Reliability Across Diverse Patient GroupsMedical Care, 1994
- The Role of Prognostic Scores in Targeting Stroke Rehabilitation in Elderly PatientsJournal of the American Geriatrics Society, 1993
- The hemiplegic arm after stroke: measurement and recovery.Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry, 1983
- Development and validation of a geriatric depression screening scale: A preliminary reportJournal of Psychiatric Research, 1982
- “Mini-mental state”Journal of Psychiatric Research, 1975
- Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of testsPsychometrika, 1951