Simple Indicator to Judge the Independence Level Required in Dressing in a Hospital Ward for Patients with Stroke

Fujita, Takaaki; Sato, Atsushi; Yamamoto, Yuichi; Yamane, Kazuhiro; Tsuchiya, Kenji J.; Otsuki, Koji; Tozato, Fusae

doi:10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2016.04.003

Cited by 1 publication

(3 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…From the reference list of these 48 articles, potentially relevant references underwent primary and secondary screening, identifying 6 additional articles that met the eligibility criteria. In total, 54 articles [4,6,9–60] were selected for this scoping review (Fig. 1).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(3) Discriminative factors and cutoff values based on cross-sectional study All of the cross-sectional studies with specific ADLs as outcomes that were adopted for this review included subacute patients. BBS was the most commonly used variable in studies differentiating independence in ADLs (6 of 7 articles) [54][55][56][57]59,60]. The BBS cutoff values to discriminate between independence and supervision (FIM instrument score ≥6 and ≤5) were as follows: 40-41 points for grooming [54,55], 41-44 points for dressing [55][56][57], 39-43 points for toileting [55], 41 points for transferring [59], 48 points for bathing [60], and 49-54 points for stair climbing [55,59].…”

Section: Specific Adlsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…BBS was the most commonly used variable in studies differentiating independence in ADLs (6 of 7 articles) [54][55][56][57]59,60]. The BBS cutoff values to discriminate between independence and supervision (FIM instrument score ≥6 and ≤5) were as follows: 40-41 points for grooming [54,55], 41-44 points for dressing [55][56][57], 39-43 points for toileting [55], 41 points for transferring [59], 48 points for bathing [60], and 49-54 points for stair climbing [55,59]. Furthermore, when discriminating between supervision and level of need for assistance (FIM instrument score ≥5 and ≤4), the cutoff values were as follows: Simple Test for Evaluating Hand Function of the non-affected side score of 68, Vitality Index score of 9, and FIM instrument cognition of 23 [54] in grooming; BBS score of 32 [56] in dressing; Functional Assessment for Control of Trunk score of 14 and Mini-Mental Status Examination score of 25 [58] in toileting; BBS score of 30 [59] in transferring; and BBS score of 41 [59] for stair climbing.…”

Section: Specific Adlsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Cutoff values of motor and cognitive measures for predicting and discriminating levels of activities of daily living after stroke: a scoping review

Fujita,

Kasahara,

Tsuchiya

et al. 2024

International Journal of Rehabilitation Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The various assessments performed by rehabilitation professionals not only indicate the patient’s current functional status but can also help determine the future status (prediction) or the ability to perform untested tasks (discrimination). In particular, the cutoff values are the simplest predictive and discriminative tool that can be widely used in clinical practice. The purpose of this scoping review was to summarize the current literature on cutoff values of motor and cognitive function for predicting or discriminating levels of activities of daily living after stroke. A literature search was conducted using the PubMed, CINAHL, and Scopus databases. The creation of the search criteria, primary screening of titles and abstract, and secondary screening by full-text review were performed by two rehabilitation professionals. A total of 54 articles were included. The summary of the cutoff values for prediction based on longitudinal studies revealed that an NIHSS score ≤8 and mRMI score ≥19 at acute hospitalization can predict good functional independence and walking independence, respectively, indicating reliable cutoff values. Cutoff values for predicting specific ADLs, such as toilet use or dressing, were not reported, which was a potential research gap identified in this review. Alternatively, the summary of the cutoff values for discrimination based on cross-sectional studies revealed that 288–367.5 m on the 6-min walk test and 25.5–27.6 points on the FMA-LL can discriminate community and noncommunity walkers. Considering the difference between prediction and discrimination, the reliable predicted cutoff values revealed in this review are useful for planning an intervention based on early prediction. Conversely, cutoff values for discrimination can estimate different performances with simpler test, or use as target values during rehabilitation.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%