Edwards D F, Chen Y W, Diringer M N
Program in Occupational Therapy, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Mo., USA.
Stroke. 1995 Oct;26(10):1852-8. doi: 10.1161/01.str.26.10.1852.
The growing interest in testing new therapeutic agents for acute brain injury has lead to increased use of stroke scales. The reliability and validity of these measures need to be examined more completely. We used structural equation modeling, a technique that merges the analytic procedures of factor analysis and multiple regression, to examine the reliability and construct validity of the Middle Cerebral Artery Neurological Scale and the Scandinavian Neurological Stroke Scale used together as the Unified Neurological Stroke Scale. We also analyzed the predictive validity, sensitivity, and specificity of the scales in predicting mortality and functional outcome.
We prospectively studied 84 consecutive patients admitted to a neurology/neurosurgery intensive care unit with intracerebral hemorrhage (n = 30), subarachnoid hemorrhage (n = 15), ischemic stroke (n = 15), and traumatic brain injury (n = 24). Patients were evaluated within 24 hours of admission and at 48-hour intervals until intensive care unit discharge. A total of 386 assessments were obtained. The Functional Independence Measure was administered by telephone 3 months after hospital discharge.
High levels of reliability and construct validity were observed for the majority of the Unified Stroke Scale items. Facial palsy and eye movement items had the lowest reliability and validity. Both the Middle Cerebral Artery and Scandinavian Scales were significant predictors of outcome. Sensitivity and specificity varied by diagnosis. Predictive validity of functional outcome was best in groups with ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke rather than traumatic brain injury and subarachnoid hemorrhage.
The Unified Stroke Scale demonstrates reliability and construct and predictive validity, and its use is supported in ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke. Structural equation modeling is an appropriate technique for use with scales of this type.
对急性脑损伤新治疗药物测试的兴趣日益浓厚,导致卒中量表的使用增加。这些测量方法的可靠性和有效性需要更全面地进行检验。我们使用结构方程模型(一种融合了因子分析和多元回归分析程序的技术)来检验合并为统一神经卒中量表使用的大脑中动脉神经量表和斯堪的纳维亚神经卒中量表的可靠性和结构效度。我们还分析了这些量表在预测死亡率和功能结局方面的预测效度、敏感性和特异性。
我们对84例连续入住神经科/神经外科重症监护病房的患者进行了前瞻性研究,其中脑出血患者30例、蛛网膜下腔出血患者15例、缺血性卒中患者15例、创伤性脑损伤患者24例。患者在入院后24小时内进行评估,并每隔48小时评估一次,直至重症监护病房出院。共获得386次评估。出院3个月后通过电话进行功能独立性测量。
统一卒中量表的大多数项目具有较高的可靠性和结构效度。面瘫和眼球运动项目的可靠性和效度最低。大脑中动脉量表和斯堪的纳维亚量表都是结局的重要预测指标。敏感性和特异性因诊断而异。功能结局的预测效度在缺血性和出血性卒中组中最佳,而非创伤性脑损伤和蛛网膜下腔出血组。
统一卒中量表具有可靠性、结构效度和预测效度,在缺血性和出血性卒中中支持使用该量表。结构方程模型是适用于此类量表的技术。