Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Advertisement

Clinical Rehabilitation
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 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
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bakheit, A.
Right arrow Articles by Hull, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Bakheit, A.
Right arrow Articles by Hull, R.
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?

Validity of a self-administered version of the Barthel Index in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Amo Bakheit

Department of Rheumatology and Rehabilitation, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth

SR Harries

Department of Rheumatology and Rehabilitation, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth

RG Hull

Department of Rheumatology and Rehabilitation, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth

The Barthel Index (BI) in its original format must be completed by a therapist. To overcome this disadvantage a self-administered version of the BI was designed, the modified Barthel Index (MBI). In the present study the MBI was validated against the original BI and also the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) in 33 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). There was a close correlation between BI and MBI in eight out of the 10 items of the scale and in the overall score. Similarly, there was a good correlation between MBI and HAQ but only in patients with mild disability. Further analysis of data showed that the HAQ overestimated the degree of disability in patients with RA and may be less reliable than the MBI in measuring functional independence in these patients.

Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 9, No. 3, 234-237 (1995)
DOI: 10.1177/026921559500900309


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
ptjournalHome page
B. L Tieman, R. J Palisano, E. J Gracely, and P. L Rosenbaum
Gross Motor Capability and Performance of Mobility in Children With Cerebral Palsy: A Comparison Across Home, School, and Outdoors/Community Settings
Physical Therapy, May 1, 2004; 84(5): 419 - 429.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Clin RehabilHome page
S. H Richards, T. J Peters, J. Coast, D. J Gunnell, M.-A. Darlow, and J. Pounsford
Inter-rater reliability of the Barthel ADL Index: how does a researcher compare to a nurse?
Clinical Rehabilitation, January 1, 2000; 14(1): 72 - 78.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Clin RehabilHome page
C. Hocking, M. Williams, J. Broad, and J. Baskett
Sensitivity of Shah, Vanclay and Cooper's modified Barthel Index
Clinical Rehabilitation, February 1, 1999; 13(2): 141 - 147.
[Abstract] [PDF]



Advertisement