Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Initial validation of the Swedish version of the London Handicap Scale

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective: To adapt and evaluate the unweighted version of the London Handicap Scale (LHS) for use in Sweden. Materials & Methods: Respondent burden, linguistic validity and patient perceived relevance was assessed in 16 neurologically ill patients. Internal consistency reliability and construct validity were evaluated among 89 stroke survivors six months after discharge. Results: Patients perceived the LHS as relevant and easy to understand and complete. Mean time to complete the questionnaire was 10 min. Cronbach’s alpha reliability was 0.85. The LHS differentiated between patients living at home and in special accommodations. As expected, scores correlated strongly and weakly with indices of related and more remote constructs, respectively. There were no floor-, but large ceiling effects. Conclusions: The observations reported here are in accordance with previous studies using the original British LHS and provide initial support for the reliability and validity of the instrument for use in Sweden. However, ceiling effects may limit its usefulness as an outcome measure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

ADL:

activities of daily living

ADLs:

ADL-staircase

CI:

Confidence interval

ICF:

International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health

ICIDH:

International Classification of Impairment, Disability and Handicap

IQR:

interquartile range

LHS:

London Handicap Scale

MCS:

mental component summary score

PCS:

physical component summary score

SD:

standard deviation

SF-12:

12-item Short Form Health Survey

References

  1. (1980). International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps: A Manual of Classification Relating to the Consequences of Disease. World Health Organization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  2. (1994). Handicap one year after stroke: validity of a new scale. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 57: 825–829

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. (1994). Measuring handicap: motives, methods and a model. Qual Health Care 3: 53–57

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. (1994). Measuring handicap: the London Handicap Scale, a new outcome measure for chronic disease. Qual Health Care 3: 11–16

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. (2002). International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. World Health Organization, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  6. (2002). International classification of functioning, disability and health: an introduction and discussion of its potential impact on rehabilitation services and research. J Rehabil Med 34: 201–204

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. (2003). Measuring participation according to the International Classfication of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Disabil Rehabil 25: 577–587

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. (2002). Team approach versus ad hoc health services for young people with physical disabilities: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 360: 1280–1286

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. (2005). How does stroke restrict participation in long-term post-stroke survivors?. Acta Neurol Scand 112: 157–162

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. (2001). Cross-cultural validation of the London Handicap Scale in Hong Kong Chinese. Clin Rehab 15: 177–185

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Pajalic Z, Karlsson S, Westergren A. Functioning and subjective health among stroke survivors after discharge from hospital. J Adv Nurs; in press

  12. (1996). Longitudinal studies of dependence in daily life activities among elderly persons. Scand J Rehabil Med Suppl 34: 1–35

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. (2000). The London handicap scale: a re-evaluation of its validity using standard scoring and simple summation. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 68: 365–367

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. (1996). A 12-item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care 34: 220–233

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. (2004). Integrating patient-reported outcomes. Value Health 7: S9–S12

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. (1995). Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to their Development and Use. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  17. (1997). Performance of a new, HIV/AIDS-targeted quality of life (HAT-QoL) instrument in asymptomatic seropostivie individuals. Qual Life Res 6: 561–571

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. (1994). Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate?. Qual Life Res 4(4): 293–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. (2000). Criteria for assessing the tools of disability outcomes research. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 81: S15–S20

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. (2001). Psychometric properties of the Impact on Participation and Autonomy Questionnaire. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 82: 210–216

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. (1998). Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technol Assess 2: 1–74

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. (2002). Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res 11: 193–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. (2003). Are the ICF activity and participation dimensions distinct?. J Rehabil Med 35: 145–149

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. (2002). Quality of life measures after stroke. Uses and abuses of the SF-36. Stroke 33: 1348–1356

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. (2004). Function and disability in late life: comparison of the Late-Life Function and Disability Instrument to the Short-Form-36 and the London Handicap Scale. Disabil Rehabil 26(6): 362–370

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. (1996 Sep). Handicap in inflammatory arthritis. Br J Rheumatol 35(9): 891–897

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. (2000). A comparison of the responsiveness of the Nottingham extended activities of daily living, London handicap scale and SF-36. Disabil Rehabil 22(17): 786–793

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Gerontology and Caring Sciences, Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, P.O. box 157, 221 00, SE, Lund, Sweden

    Albert Westergren & Peter Hagell

  2. The Vårdal Institute, the Swedish Institute for Health Science, Lund University, Lund, Sweden

    Albert Westergren & Peter Hagell

  3. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Central Hospital Kristianstad, Northeast Skåne Health Care District, Kristianstad, Sweden

    Albert Westergren

  4. Department of Neurology, University Hospital, Lund, Sweden

    Peter Hagell

Authors
  1. Albert Westergren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter Hagell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Albert Westergren.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Westergren, A., Hagell, P. Initial validation of the Swedish version of the London Handicap Scale. Qual Life Res 15, 1251–1256 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-006-0054-4

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-006-0054-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation