Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T09:19:34.580Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reliability and responsiveness of the Barry–Albright Dystonia Scale

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 1999

Margaret J Barry ,
Jessie M VanSwearingen  and
A Leland Albright
Margaret J Barry
Affiliation:
Department of Neurosurgery, Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Jessie M VanSwearingen
Affiliation:
Department of Physical Therapy, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
A Leland Albright
Affiliation:
Department of Neurosurgery, Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Get access

Abstract

The reliability and responsiveness of the Barry–Albright Dystonia (BAD) Scale, a 5-point ordinal severity scale for secondary dystonia, was assessed. For interrater reliability, 13 raters scored 10 videotaped patients; for intrarater reliability, two raters rated the videotape again. For test–retest reliability, patients were rated on two occasions. Four inexperienced raters scored patients, received training, then scored additional patients. To assess responsiveness, we compared patient and physician global ratings of change (better, same, and worse) with BAD Scale score changes for 18 patients on intrathecal baclofen (ITB) trials. We assessed reliability with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The mean ICC for total BAD Scale scores were as follows: interrater reliability 0.866, intrarater reliability 0.967 and 0.978, test–retest reliability 0.978 (before training) and 0.967 (after training). We found the BAD Scale responsive to change, with most improved scores in patients rated by the patient, family, and neurosurgeon as ‘better’. The total scores were reliable for experienced raters. We recommend training for clinicians interested in using the scale.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology , Volume 41 , Issue 6 , June 1999 , pp. 404 - 411
Copyright
© 1999 Mac Keith Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)