This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by van Bennekom, C. A. Articles by Kuik, D. J Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by van Bennekom, C. A. Articles by Kuik, D. J Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Value of measuring perceived problems in a stroke population

Rehabilitation Centre Heliomare, Relweg 51, 1949 EC Wijk aan Zee, The Netherlands

Frank Jelles

University Hospital, Vrije Universiteit, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Amsterdam

Gustaaf J Lankhorst

University Hospital, Vrije Universiteit, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Amsterdam

Dirk J Kuik

Vrije Universiteit, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Amsterdam

Functional status assessments mainly concentrate on difficulty in performance and/or dependency on other people. Very few assessments document the perceived problems of the patient regarding the assessed activities. This study evaluates the added value of measuring perceived problems using a parallel assessment method: the Rehabilitation Activities Profile. The study population consisted of 57 stroke patients living at home, six months after stroke. Thirty-three were receiving therapy (physiotherapy or rehabilitation day care). The patients indicated that they perceived a number of problems, especially on the items 'walking', 'using transport', 'leisure activities' and 'relation with friends/acquaintances'. The perceived problem scores did not relate in a uniform way to the disability scores. The perceived problem scores were dichotomized. The proportions of persons with perceived problems showed statistically significant differences between the therapy group and the nontherapy group for 15 out of 21 items (p <0.02). The cumulative relative frequency distributions showed that the therapy group indicated significantly more problems than the nontherapy group (p <0.01). It was concluded that it is at least as important to measure perceived problems as it is to measure disabilities.

Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 10, No. 4, 288-294 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/026921559601000405


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. W. Bohannon, M. Ahlquist, N. Lee, and R. Maljanian Functional Gains During Acute Hospitalization for Stroke Neurorehabil Neural Repair, September 1, 2003; 17(3): 192 - 195. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Schenkman, T. M. Cutson, C. W. Zhu, and K. Whetten-Goldstein A Longitudinal Evaluation of Patients' Perceptions of Parkinson's Disease Gerontologist, December 1, 2002; 42(6): 790 - 798. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Cardol, B. A de Jong, G. A. van den Bos, A. Beelen, I. J M de Groot, and R. J de Haan Beyond disability: perceived participation in people with a chronic disabling condition Clinical Rehabilitation, January 1, 2002; 16(1): 27 - 35. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R.J. Polge, E.M. Holliday, and B.K. Bhagavan Generation of a pseudo-random set with desired correlation and probability distribution SIMULATION, May 1, 1973; 20(5): 153 - 158. [Abstract] [PDF]