Significant differences in evaluation of disability and health (ICF) core sets between stroke rehabilitants and rehabilitation team during the first year
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/jrm.v58.42856Keywords:
Activities of Daily Living, functioning., Goal setting, Rehabilitation, Shared decision-making, ICF, Screening, Health-related quality of life (HR- QoL), hemorrhagic strokeAbstract
Objective: Assessing functional abilities in stroke rehabilitation is essential, combining subjective self-reports with objective clinical evaluations.
Methods: This study aimed to compare self-reported impairments from stroke patients with rehabilitation team evaluations using the ICF stroke core set at 3 time points: 1 month post-discharge, after 6 months, and 12 months post-diagnosis. Additionally, the study sought to identify ICF subdomains most impacting health-related quality of life (HRQOL) as measured by EQ-5D. This longitudinal, retrospective observational study included consecutive 118 stroke patients at the Satahospital Rehabilitation Unit (2021–2022).
Results: Results showed that, 1 month after discharge, patients rated their functioning higher than team assessments, particularly in cognitive domains. By 12 months, patients’ self-reports indicated lower functioning than team evaluations, with discrepancies diminishing over time. Objective assessments revealed significant improvements in mobility, self-care, and cognitive functions, while patients reported progress in life activities and social interactions but little change in physical or cognitive domains. Depression levels and self-care ability (washing) were the strongest predictors of improved HRQOL.
Conclusion: These findings reveal that patients initially overestimate their abilities, influenced by a lack of awareness and emotional factors, while rehabilitation teams provide more objective evaluations and individualized rehabilitation. Integrated assessment frameworks combining subjective and objective perspectives are crucial to optimizing rehabilitation outcomes.
Downloads
References
Kwakkel G, Kollen, BJ. Predicting activities after stroke: what is clinically relevant? Int J Stroke 2013; 8: 25–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4949.2012.00967.x
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4949.2012.00967
Donnellan C, Hevey D, Hickey A, O’Neill D. Defining and quantifying coping strategies after stroke: a review. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2006; 77: 1208–1218.
https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.2005.085670
Crowley D, Andrews L. The longitudinal relationship between acceptance and anxiety and depression in people who have had a stroke. Aging Ment Health 2018; 22: 1321–1328.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2017.1348478 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2017.1348478
Fowler EA, Sala SD, Hart SR, McIntosh RD. Over- and underestimation of motor ability after a stroke: implications for anosognosia. Neuropsychologia 2018; 119: 191–196.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.08.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.08.007
Heilman KM, Barrett AM, Adair JC. Possible mechanisms of anosognosia: a defect in self-awareness. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 1998; 353: 1903–1909.
https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.1998.0342 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.1998.0342
Bisiach E, Vallar G, Perani D, Papagno C, Berti A. Unawareness of disease following lesions of the right hemisphere: anosognosia for hemiplegia and anosognosia for hemianopia. Neuropsychologia 1986; 24: 471–482.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0028-3932(86)90092-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0028-3932(86)90092-8
Baier B, Geber C, Müller-Forell W, Müller N, Dietrich M, Karnath H-O. Anosognosia for obvious visual field defects in stroke patients. Brain Struct Funct 2015; 220: 1855–1860.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00429-014-0753-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00429-014-0753-5
Donnellan C, Hevey A, Hickey A, O’Neil D. Defining and quantifying coping strategies after stroke: a review. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2006; 77: 1208–1218.
https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.2005.085670 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.2005.085670
Lazarus RS, Folkman S. Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer; 1984.
Pearlin L, Schooler C. The structure of coping. J Health Soc Behav 1978; 19: 2–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2136319
Graven LJ, Grant JS, Vance DE, Pryor ER, Grubbs L, Karioth S. Coping styles associated with heart failure outcomes: a systematic review. J Nurs Educ Pract 2014; 4: 227–242.
https://doi.org/10.5430/jnep.v4n2p227 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5430/jnep.v4n2p227
Rice DB, McIntyre A, Mirkowski M, Janzen S, Viana R, Britt E, et al. Patient-centered goal setting in a hospital-based outpatient stroke rehabilitation center. PM R 2017; 9: 856–865. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmrj.2016.12.004
https://doi.org/10.2810.1016/j.pmrj.2016.12.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2016/12/004
Chen S, Tao J, Tao Q, Fang Y, Zhou X, Chen H, et al. Rater experience influences reliability and validity of the Brief International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health Core Set for Stroke. J Rehabil Med 2016; 48: 265–272.
https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-2063 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-2063
Kohler F, Connolly C, Sakaria A, Stendara K, Buhagiar M, Mojaddidi M. Can the ICF be used as a rehabilitation outcome measure? A study looking at the inter- and intra-rater reliability of ICF categories derived from an ADL assessment tool. J Rehabil Med 2013; 45: 881–887.
https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-1194 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-1194
Lemberg I, Kirchberger I, Stucki G, Cieza A. The ICF Core Set for stroke from the perspective of physicians: a worldwide validation study using the Delphi technique. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2010; 46: 377–388.
Kilkki M, Stolt M, Rannikko S, Pasanen M, Tarvonen-Schröder S. Patient- and proxy perceptions on functioning after stroke rehabilitation using the 12-item WHODAS 2.0: a longitudinal cohort study Disabil Rehabil 2023; 14: 1–10.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2023.2173813 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2023.2173813
Saltychev M, Tarvonen-Schröder S, Bärlund E, Laimi K. Differences between rehabilitation team, rehabilitants, and significant others in opinions on functioning of subacute stroke survivors: Turku ICF study. Int J Rehabil Res 2014; 37: 229–235.
https://doi.org/10.1097/MRR.0000000000000065 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MRR.0000000000000065
Demir YP, Balci NÇ, Ünlüer NÖ, Uluğ N, Dogru E, Kilinç M, et al. Three different points of view in stroke rehabilitation: patient, caregiver, and physiotherapist. Top Stroke Rehabil 2015; 22: 377–385.
https://doi.org/10.1179/1074935714Z.0000000042 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1179/1074935714Z.0000000042
Tarvonen-Schröder S, Laimi K, Kauko T, Saltychev M. Change in agreement between stroke survivors and their significant others on the severity of restrictions of functioning in a 1-year follow-up. Int J Rehabil Res 2015; 38: 327–332.
https://doi.org/10.1097/MRR.0000000000000130 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MRR.0000000000000130
Keith RA, Granger CV, Hamilton BB, Sherwin FS. The functional independence measure: a new tool for rehabilitation. Adv Clin Rehabil 1987; 1: 6–18.
Sintonen H. The 15D instrument of health-related quality of life: properties and applications. Ann Med 2001; 33: 328–336.
https://doi.org/10.3109/07853890109002086 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/07853890109002086
Üstün TB, Kostanjsek N, Chatterji S, Rehm J. Measuring health and disability. Manual for WHO Disability Assessment Schedule. WHODAS 2.0. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010.
Üstün TB, Chatterji S, Kostanjsek N, Rehm J, Kennedy C, Epping-Jordan J, et al. Developing the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0. Bull World Health Organ 2010; 88: 815–823.
https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.09.067231 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.09.067231
Brooks R. EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy 1996; 37: 53–72.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-8510(96)00822-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-8510(96)00822-6
EuroQoL: a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 1990; 16: 199–208.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-8510(90)90421-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-8510(90)90421-9
Schrag A, Selai C, Jahanshahi M, Quinn NP. The EQ-5D – a generic quality of life measure – is a useful instrument to measure quality of life in patients with Parkinson’s disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2000; 69: 67–73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.69.1.67
https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.69.1.6
Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1988.
Kwon SY, Hong SE, Kim EJ, Kim CH, Joa KL, Jung HY. Monitoring of functioning status in subjects with chronic Stroke in South Korea using WHODAS II. Ann Rehabil Med 2016; 40: 111–119.
https://doi.org/10.5535/arm.2016.40.1.111 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5535/arm.2016.40.1.111
Yoshida HM, Lima FO, Barreira J, Appenzeller S, Fernandes PT. Is there a correlation between depressive symptoms and motor skills in post-stroke patients? Arq Neuropsiquiatr 2019; 77: 155–160.
https://doi.org/10.1590/0004-282X20190012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/0004-282x20190012
Tur BS, Gursel YK, Yavuzer G, Kucukdeveci A, Arasil T. Rehabilitation outcome of Turkish stroke patients: in a team approach setting. Int J Rehabil Res 2003; 26: 271–277. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mrr.0000102079.84366.32
https://doi.org/10.1097/00004356-200312000-00004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00004356-200312000-00004
Ayerbe L, Ayis S, Wolfe CD, Rudd AG. Natural history, predictors and outcomes of depression after stroke: systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Psychiatry 2013; 202: 14–21.
https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.111.107664 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.111.107664
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Aet Ristmägi, Hannu Heikkila, Olavi Airaksinen
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All digitalized JRM contents is available freely online. The Foundation for Rehabilitation Medicine owns the copyright for all material published until volume 40 (2008), as from volume 41 (2009) authors retain copyright to their work and as from volume 49 (2017) the journal has been published Open Access, under CC-BY-NC licences (unless otherwise specified). The CC-BY-NC licenses allow third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material for non-commercial purposes, provided proper attribution to the original work.
From 2024, articles are published under the CC-BY licence. This license permits sharing, adapting, and using the material for any purpose, including commercial use, with the condition of providing full attribution to the original publication.
