|
KMID : 0363619960170010048
|
|
Journal of Korean Oriental Medicine
1996 Volume.17 No. 1 p.48 ~ p.83
|
|
|
Study on function evaluation tools for stroke patients
|
|
Ko Seong-Gyu
Cho Ki-Ho
Lee Kyung-Sup
Ko Chang-Nam
Kim Young-Suk
Bae Hyung-Sup
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
Our conclusions for function evaluation tools of Stroke patients are as follows. 1. Evaluating tools of Activities of Daily Living, Katz Index, Barthel Index, Modified Barthel Index have high validity and reliability because of ease of measuring, high accuracy, consistency, sensitivity and sufficient stastistics, but they mainly measure motor function except sense, mentation, language, and social conception. Therefore cerebrovascular disease and brain injury in trauma patients with lacked acknowledgement and sensation, we are not able to apply these tools. 2. PULSES Profile is a useful scale for measuring the patient’’s over-all status, upper and lower limb functions, sensory components, excretary functions, and intellectual and emotional adaptabilities. It is recognized as a good, useful tool to evaluate patient’’s whole function. 3. Motor Assessment Scale was designed to measure the progress of stroke patients. The scale was supplemented with upper arm function items. We believe that the Motor Assessment Scale could be a useful evaluation tool with inter-rater reliability ,test-retest reliability. 4. The existing evaluation tools, Katz Index, Barthel Index, Modified Barthel Index, PULSES Profile, Motor Assessment Scale, mainly measured the rehabilitational motor function of sequela of cerebrovascular patients. On the other hand CNS & INH stroke scale can measure cerebrovascular disease patient’’s neurologic deficits and over-all stautus, which are recognition ability, speech status, motor function, sensory function, activities of daily living. Those scales have been recognized as useful tools to measure function of cerebrovascular disease patients and have increased in use. 5. Every function evaluation tool was recognized to have some validity and inter-rater, test-retest reliability in items of each evaluation tool and total scores of each evaluation tools, but it is thought that none of these scales have been fully validated and proved reliable. Therefore afterward, the development of a highly reliable rating system may best be accomplished by a careful comparison of several tools, using the same patients and the same observers in order to choose the most reliable items from each. 6. Ideal evaluation tools must have the following conditions; (1) It should show the objective functional statues at the same time. (2) It should be repeated consecutively to know changed function status. (3) It should be easy to observe the treatment program. (4) It should have the same result with another rater to help rater exchange information with treatment team members. (5) It should be practical and simple. (6) The patient should not suffer from the observer.
|
|
|
KEYWORD
|
|
|
stroke, Functional Evalution
|
|
|
FullTexts / Linksout information
|
|
|
|
|
|
Listed journal information
|
|
|
|