Table 3

Quality appraisal of included papers using ISOQOL standards as a reference

Patient-reported measureQualitative work relevant to sampleReliabilityContent validityConstruct validityResponsivenessInterpretabilityFeasibility
SASCPatient/health professional interviews; literature search.Internal consistency: Cronbachs alpha=0.86 for hospital satisfaction and 0.77 for home satisfaction.
Test-retest: weighted kappa=good reliability for 11 questions. Mean difference on test-retest=0.59 (SD=2.40) hospital satisfaction; 0.32 (SD=2.1) home satisfaction.
By post—28 then 23 participants.Principle components analysis revealed two factors.
High correlation between hospital satisfaction and Faces Scale satisfaction measure (r=0.67; p<0.00005). No strong correlations found between hospital satisfaction and measures of function or quality of life. Weak negative correlation found with the Geriatric Depression score (r=−0.26; p=−0.0015). No strong correlations found between home satisfaction and other measures apart from a Nottingham extended ADL scale (r=0.30; p=0.00098).
Not tested.High score=greater satisfaction
Score if answering ‘satisfied’ to all questions: hospital satisfaction=16/24,
home satisfaction=10/15
Response rate to postal questionnaire 87%.
Stroke-PROMPatient/health professional interviews; literature search.Internal consistency: Cronbach’s alpha=0.905 for the total score and for the four domains it ranged from 0.861 to 0.908.
No test-retest.
By referring to literature, consulting questionnaires, interviewing patients and consulting with patients, physician experts and one psychometric expert. Confirmed using the CVI .Confirmatory factor analysis: index of fit met the standard requirements.
Discriminant validity: mRS assessed disability and scale could differentiate between healthy controls and stroke patients with different degrees of disability.
Not tested.Higher score=more positive responses.Response rate, completion rate were over 97%. Time to completion=8.9 min.
BAPASPatient interviews and health professional expert panel.Internal consistency: Cronbachs alpha=0.86.
Test-retest: Intraclass correlation coefficient model 2,1=0.91 (95% CI 0.79 to 0.97).
Panel of experts in the field and 10 patients.Principal component analysis with number of factors fixed at 8—showed original structure (BAPAS-27) was replicated in the final BAPAS scale. The eight factors explained 84% of total variance of the BAPAS scale. Also assessed the proper construct of the BAPAS scale—two factors were obtained that explored physical dimensions and two that explore behavioural. A two-part scale was constructed (physical and behavioural).
Criterion validity tested using correlation with mRS score: r=0.65 (p<0.001).
Not tested.Higher score=more barriers.Time to complete if naive=4 min.
WHOQOL-100Expert review and focus groups but not stroke survivors specifically (results not given).Internal consistency: Cronbach’s alpha for relevant domain (environment)=0.92.
Test-retest not done in stroke survivors and not given.
Yes but not in stroke survivors and results not given.Convergent validity: correlations found between WHOQOL-100 and SF36. Fair to good for relevant domains.Not in stroke patients and results not given.Higher=better QOLLong—100 items.
P-QPDUnclear.Internal consistency: Cronbach’s alpha=information 0.82; goals needs 0.87; medical treatment 0.66.
No test-retest.
Face validity established with ‘patients and experts’.Factor analysis: three factors extracted. Comparisons of scores across known groups:subscale differences found on age, length of hospital stay, ADL (independent vs dependent). No differences based on gender, education, living arrangement or prior experience of stroke.Not tested.Higher=greater participation.Not discussed.
Chao-PCUnclear.Internal consistency: Cronbach’s alpha ranged from 0.7 to 0.76 for interpersonal trust, interpersonal knowledge and provider consistent care.
No test-retest.
Face-to-face delivery of questionnaire for 110 participants.Exploratory factor analysis: three factors supported (interpersonal trust, interpersonal knowledge, provider consistent care). Known-groups validity comparing distress and disability groups—no significant differences in scores identified.Not testedHigher=better continuity.Low response rate in postal questionnaire. Deemed not easily transferable to a UK setting without further modification.
  • ADL, activites of daily living; BAPAS, Barriers to Physical Activity after Stroke scale; CVI, content validity index; ISOQOL, International Society for Quality of Life Research; mRS, modified Rankin score; WHOQOL-100, WHO Quality of Life-100.