Clinical Rehabilitation

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Luther, A
Right arrow Articles by Grant, F
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Luther, A
Right arrow Articles by Grant, F
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 12, No. 3, 238-244 (1998)
DOI: 10.1191/026921598671668617

Reliability of stroke patients' reports on rehabilitation services received

A Luther

Stroke Research Unit, City Hospital NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK

N B Lincoln

Department of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK

F Grant

Stroke Research Unit, City Hospital NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK

Objective: To compare stroke patients' reports with service providers' reports on the rehabilitation services patients receive.

Setting: Community, predominantly urban.

Subjects: Ninety-three stroke patients who had not been admitted to hospital.

Method: Between August 1994 and August 1996, 54 general practitioner practices in Nottingham (population 344 200) were requested to notify the Nottingham Community Stroke Project of all cases of stroke. Patients were visited one month after stroke and asked to report on whether they had received any hospital, social, community or voluntary services. Some departments were contacted and asked if the patients were known to them and whether they had been seen.

Results: Patients reported having little contact with hospital or social services. Comparison of patients' reports with that of the appropriate service department showed poor agreement for community care assistants (kappa = 0.18), fair agreement for social workers (kappa = 0.59), speech therapy (kappa = 0.48), hospital outpatient appointments (kappa = 0.55) and admissions to hospital (kappa = 0.48) and good agreement for social services occupational therapists (kappa = 0.64).

Conclusion: Stroke patients' and service providers' reports on rehabilitation services may not always agree. Care should be taken when interpreting information on service provision.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Clin RehabilHome page
N B Lincoln, M F Walker, A Dixon, and P Knights
Evaluation of a multiprofessional community stroke team: a randomized controlled trial
Clinical Rehabilitation, January 1, 2004; 18(1): 40 - 47.
[Abstract] [PDF]