Validity of the Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement Scale in Acute Rehabilitation: A Comparison With the Functional Independence Measure and Stroke Impact Scale-16

• Published in: PM & R Vol. 3; no. 11; pp. 1013 - 1021
• Main Authors: Ward, Irene, PT, DPT, NCS, Pivko, Susan, PT, DPT, Cert MDT, Brooks, Gary, PT, DrPH, CCS, Parkin, Kate, PT, MA
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01.11.2011
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Disability Evaluation; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Inpatients; Length of Stay; Male; Middle Aged; Movement - physiology; Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation; Predictive Value of Tests; Prospective Studies; Recovery of Function; Reproducibility of Results; Severity of Illness Index; Stroke - diagnosis; Stroke - physiopathology; Stroke Rehabilitation; Surveys and Questionnaires
• ISSN: 1934-1482; 1934-1563
• DOI: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2011.08.537

Objective To demonstrate sensitivity to change of the Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement (STREAM) as well as the concurrent and predictive validity of the STREAM in an acute rehabilitation setting. Design Prospective cohort study. Setting Acute, in-patient rehabilitation department within a tertiary-care teaching hospital in the United States. Participants Thirty adults with a newly diagnosed, first ischemic stroke. Methods Clinical assessments were conducted on admission and then again on discharge from the rehabilitation hospital with the STREAM (total STREAM and upper extremity, lower extremity, and mobility subscales), Functional Independence Measure (FIM), and Stroke Impact Scale-16 (SIS-16). Sensitivity to change was determined with the Wilcoxon signed rank test and by the calculation of standardized response means. Spearman correlations were used to assess concurrent validity of the total STREAM and STREAM subscales with the FIM and SIS-16 on admission and discharge. We determined predictive validity for all instruments by correlating admission scores with actual and predicted length of stay and by testing associations between admission scores and discharge destination (home vs subacute facility). Main Outcomes Not applicable. Results For all instruments, there was statistically significant improvement from admission to discharge. The standardized response means for the total STREAM and STREAM subscales were large. Spearman correlations between the total STREAM and STREAM subscales and the FIM and SIS-16 were moderate to excellent, both on admission and discharge. Among change scores, only the SIS-16 correlated with the total STREAM. All 3 instruments were significantly associated with discharge destination; however, the associations were strongest for the total STREAM and STREAM subscales. All instruments showed moderate-to-excellent correlations with predicted and actual length of stay. Conclusions The STREAM is sensitive to change and demonstrates good concurrent and predictive validity as compared with the FIM and SIS-16 in the acute inpatient rehabilitation population.