Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by YOHANNES, A. M.
Right arrow Articles by CONNOLLY, M. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by YOHANNES, A. M.
Right arrow Articles by CONNOLLY, M. J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© 1998 Oxford University Press

research-article

A comparison of the Barthel index and Nottingham extended activities of daily living scale in the assessment of disability in chronic airflow limitation in old age

ABEBAW M. YOHANNES, JAMAL ROOMI, KAREN WATERS1 and MARTIN J. CONNOLLY

Department of Geriatric Medicine, University of Manchester, Barnes Hospital Kingsway, Cheadle, Cheshire SK8 2NY UK
1Department of Nursing, University of Manchester, Barnes Hospital Kingsway, Cheadle, Cheshire SK8 2NY UK

Address correspondence to: M. J. Connolly. Fax (+44) 161 276 3541

INTRODUCTION:: there is no disease-specific instrument for measuring activities of daily living (ADLs) in elderly patients with chronic airflow limitation (CAL). We assessed sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values of two ADL scales: the Barthel index and the Nottingham extended ADL scale in elderly people with and without CAL.

METHODS:: the Breathing Problems Questionnaire was used as a measure of quality of life (a low score indicates good quality of life) in 96 outpatients (56 men) with CAL aged 70–93 (mean 78) years and 55 community-dwelling controls (23 men) aged 71–90 (mean 78) years with normal lung function drawn from a recent community survey. CAL subjects had been clinically stable for >6 weeks. All subjects were cognitively intact.

RESULTS:: mean best 1 s forced expiratory volume/forced vital capacity was 45.5% (SE 1.4) in CAL subjects and 71.4% (SE 1.3) in controls. All CAL subjects considered themselves disabled and had higher breathing questionnaire scores [geometric mean scores: 395 (range 13–112) vs 4.8 (range 0.6–40) for controls; t= 13.4, P<0.0001]. However, the Nottingham extended ADL index (threshold >18) discriminated better than the Barthel index (threshold >17) in terms of sensitivity (76% vs 19%; x2=60.9, P< 0.0001) and negative predictive value (75% vs 40%; x2=20.2, P<0.0001). Altering the Barthel threshold did not improve its performance. Multiple regression analysis showed that variability in physiological and psychological variables related to CAL predicted variability in Nottingham extended ADL score (R2=0.71) but not in Barthel score.

CONCLUSIONS:: the Barthel index underestimates disability in CAL in old age. The Nottingham extended ADL discriminates better between normal old people and those with CAL.

Keywords: Barthel index, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, disability, Nottingham activites of daily living index

Received February 21, 1997;
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Clin RehabilHome page
A. M Yohannes and M. J Connolly
Early mobilization with walking aids following hospital admission with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
Clinical Rehabilitation, May 1, 2003; 17(5): 465 - 471.
[Abstract] [PDF]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.