Comparison of Time Requirements, Financial Accessibility and Reliability of Tests of Fine Motoric for Patients after Vascular Cerebral Stroke from the Ergotherapy Standpoint

Czech version

Authors: B. Kvapilová ¹; K. Hoidekrová ^2,3; Y. Angerová ¹; D. Pavlů ³
Authors‘ workplace: Klinika rehabilitačního lékařství 1. LF UK a Všeobecné fakultní nemocnice v Praze ¹; Rehabilitační ústav Kladruby ²; Fakulta tělovýchovy a sportu UK. Praha ³
Published in: Rehabil. fyz. Lék., 26, 2019, No. 3, pp. 131-138.
Category: Original Papers

Overview

Basis: There are many tests to evaluate fine motor skills for stroke patients. In clinical practice, occupational therapists have to decide which outcome measure is the most suitable for them. The decision is often based on psychometric properties, cost, and duration of test administration

Purpose: Compare fine motor outcome measures in terms of time, cost and test-retest reliability.

Methods: The PubMed database was searched for studies that critically evaluates the most common upper extremity tests for patients after stroke from 2013 to 2017.

Results: Action Research Arm Test, Motor Assessment Scale and Chedoke McMaster Stroke Assessment have the highest test-retest reliability (0,98). The shortest administration time take Box and Block Test (5min) a Nine – Hole Peg Test (10min). In terms of price, Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory, Fugl - Mayer Assessment, Motor Assessment Scale, Chedoke McMaster Stroke Assessment and Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement are free.

Conclusions: The choice of test depends on many factors, one of them should be the psychometric parameters of the outcome measure. Usually, at least a time-consuming test is chosen, but it does not evaluate multiple grips or the function of the entire upper limb. In terms of price, it is up to the organization that provides the finance to purchase the test, the cost of it greatly influences the decision to choose a standardized tool.

Keywords:

stroke – fine motor skills – outcome measures – upper extremity

Sources

1. Action Research Armtest. Action Research Armtest [online]. Amsterdam: VU University Medical Center, 2019 [cit. 2019-05-08]. Dostupné z: http://aratest.eu/Index.htm.

2. ANDRESEN, E. M.: Criteria for assessing the tools of disability outcomes research. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2000, č. 81, s. 15-20

3. ASABA, E., NAKAMURA, M., ASAB, A., KOTTOR, A.: Integrating occupational therapy specific assessments in practice: Exploring Practitioner Experiences. Occup. Ther. Int. 2017, s. 1-8

4. ASHFORD, S., SLADE, M., MALAPRADE, F., TURNER-STOKES, L.: Evaluation of functional outcome measures for the hemiparetic upper limb: A systematic review. J. Rehabil. Med., roč. 40, 2008, č. 10, s. 787-795

5. BAKER, K., S., CANO, J., DIANE, E.: Outcome Measurement in Stroke. Stroke. 2011, 42(6), s. 1787-1794

6. BARRECA, S., STRATFORD, P., MASTERS, L., LAMBERT, L., GRIFFITHS, J., MCBAY, C.: Validation of Three Shortened Versions of the Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory. Physiotherapy Canada., roč. 58, 2006, č. 2, s. 148-156

7. BEEBE, J., LANG, C.: Relationships and responsiveness of six upper extremity function tests during the first six months of recovery after stroke. JNPT., roč. 33, 2009, č. 2, s. 96-103

8. BOHNEN, C. L.: outcome measure use in occupational therapy for upper extremity rehabilitation: results of a survey of therapist clinical practice. Minnesota, 2011

9. CARR, J., SHEPHERD, R.: Motor assessment scale for stroke. Physical therapy., roč. 65, 1994, č. 2, s. 175-180

10. CARR, J., SHEPHERD, R., NORDHOLM, L., LYNNE, D.: investigation of a new motor assessment scale for stroke patients. Physical Therapy., roč. 65, 1985, č. 2, s. 175- 180

11. COLE, B., FINCH, E., GOWLAND, C., MAYO, N.: Physical rehabilitation outcome measures. Canada: Williams and Wilkins, 1995.

12. COLQUHOUN, H. L., LAMONTAGNE, M., DUNCAN, E., FIANDER, M., CHAMPAGNE, C., GRIMSHAW, J.: A syste-matic review of interventions to increase the use of standar-dized outcome measures by rehabilitation professionals.Clinical Rehabilitation., roč. 31, 2017, č. 3, s. 299-309

13. CONNELL, L., TYSON, S.: Clinical reality of measuring upper-limb ability in neurologic conditions: a systematic review. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil., roč. 93, 2012, č. 2, s. 221-228

14. CREEK, J.: Occupational therapy defined as a complex intervention. London: College of Occupational Therapists, 2003.

15. DE KLERK, S., BUCHANAN, H., PRETORIUS, B.: Occupational therapy hand assessment practices: Cause for concern?. South African Journal of Occupational Therapy., roč. 45, 2015, č. 2, s. 43-50

16. DUNCAN, E.: Skills for practice in occupational therapy. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone/Elsevier, 2009.

17. FAYAZI, M., DEHKORDI S., DADGOO, M., SALEHI, M.: Test-retest reliability of Motricity Index strength assessments for lower extremity in post stroke hemiparesis. Medical Journal of the Islamic republic of Iran., roč. 26, 2012, č. 1, s. 27 - 30

18. Fugl - Meyer Assessment of Motor Recovery after Stroke. Shirely Ryan Abilitylab [online]. Chicago, 2016 [cit. 2019-05-12]. Dostupné z: https://www.sralab.org/rehabilitation-measures/fugl-meyer-assessment-motor-recovery-after-stroke

19. GAUNAURD, I., SPAULDING, S., AMTMANN, D., SALEM, R., GAILEY, R., MORGAN, S. HAFNER, B.: Use of and confidence in administering outcome measures among clinical prosthetists: Results from a national survey and mixed-methods training program. Prosthetics and Orthotics International., roč. 39, 2014, č. 4, s. 314-321

20. GLADSTONE, D., DANELLS, C., BLACK, S.: The Fugl-Meyer Assessment of motor recovery after stroke: a critical review of its measurement Properties. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair., roč. 16, 2016, č. 3, s. 232-240

21. GOWLAND, C., STRATFORD, P., WARD, M.: Measuring physical impairment and disability with the Chedoke-McMaster Stroke Assessment. Stroke., roč. 24, 1993, č. 1, s. 58-63

22. Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory. Shirely Ryan Abilitylab [online]. Chicago, 2016 [cit. 2019-05-08]. Dostupné z: https://www.sralab.org/rehabilitation-measures/chedoke-arm-and-hand-activity-inventory-7

23. Chedoke McMaster Stroke Assessment. Shirely Ryan Abilitylab [online]. Chicago, 2019 [cit. 2019-05-12]. Dostupné z: https://www.sralab.org/rehabilitation-measures/chedoke-mcmaster-stroke-assessment-measure

24. CHEN, H., CHEN, C., HSUEH, I., HUANG, S., HSIEH, C.: Test-retest reproducibility and smallest real difference of 5 hand function tests in patients with stroke. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair., roč. 23, 2009, č. 5, s. 435-440

25. CHEN, H., HSIEH, C., LO, S., LIAW L., CHEN, S., LIN, J.: The test-retest reliability of 2 mobility performance tests in patients with chronic stroke. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair., roč. 21, 2007, č. 4, s. 347-352

26. JEBSEN, R., TAYLOR, N., TRIESCHMANN, R., HOWARD, L.: An objective and standardized test of hand function. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil., roč. 50, 1969, č. 6, s. 311-319.

27. JOHNSON, D., HARRIS, J., STRATFORD, P., RICHARDSON, J.: Inter-rater reliability of the Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory. NeuroRehabilitation., roč. 40, 2017, č. 2, s. 201-209

28. KIDD, D., STEWART, G., BALDRY, J., JOHNSON, J., ROSSITER, D., PETRUCKEVITCH, A., THOMPSON, A.: The Functional Independence Measure: A comparative validity and reliability study. Disability and Rehabilitation., roč. 17, 2009, č. 1, s. 10-14

29. KULIŠŤÁK, P.: Klinická neuropsychologie v praxi. Praha: Univerzita Karlova, Karolinum, 2017.

30. LANG, C., BLAND, M., BAILEY, R., SCHAEFER, S., BIRKENMEIER, R.: Assessment of upper extremity impairment, function, and activity after stroke: foundations for clinical decision making. Journal of Hand Therapy., roč. 26, 2013, č. 2, s. 104-115

31. LANG, C., BEEBE, J.: Relating movement control at 9 upper extremity segments to loss of hand function in people with chronic hemiparesis. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair., roč. 21, 2007, č. 3, s. 279-291

32. LANG, C., EDWARDS, D., BIRKENMEIER, R., DROMERICK, A.: Estimating minimal clinically important differences of upper-extremity measures early after stroke. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil., roč. 89, 2008, č. 9, s. 1693-1700

33. LAVER-FAWCETT, A.: Routine standardised outcome measurement to evaluate the effectiveness of occupational therapy interventions: essential or optional? Ergoterapeuten., 4, 2014, s. 28-37

34. LAVER-FAWCETT, A.: Assessment, evaluation and outcome measurement. in: E. CARA a A. MACRAE, A. Psychosocial occupational therapy: an evolving practice. Hingham Massachusetts: Cengage Learning - Delmar Publishers., roč 27, 2012, č. 2, Kapitola 18.

35. LAW, M., MCCOLL., M.: Interventions, effects, and outcomes in occupational therapy: adults and older adults. Thorofare, NJ: Slack, 2010.

36. LAW, M., BAUM, C., DUNN, W.: Measuring occupational performance: supporting best practice in occupational therapy. Thorofare, NJ: SLACK, 2005

37. LIN, K., CHUANG, L., WU, C., HSIEH, Y., CHANG, W.: Responsiveness and validity of three dexterous function measures in stroke rehabilitation. The Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development., roč. 47, 2010, č. 6

38. MILLER, P., HUIJBREGTS, M., GOWLAND, C., BARRECA, S., TORRESIN, W., MORELAND, J.: Chedoke-McMaster Stroke Assessment. McMaster University and Hamilton Health Sciences, 2008, s. 1-45

39. MOHAMMED A., REED, K., SHABAN NADAR, M.: Assessments used in occupational therapy practice: an exploratory study. Occupational Therapy In Health Care., roč. 23, 2009, č. 4, s. 302-318

40. Motor Assessment Scale. Shirely Ryan Abilitylab [online]. Chicago, 2019 [cit. 2019-05-12]. Dostupné z: https://www.sralab.org/rehabilitation-measures/motor-assessment-scale

41. Motricity Index. Shirely Ryan Abilitylab [online]. Chicago, 2016 [cit. 2019-05-12]. Dostupné z: https://www.sralab.org/rehabilitation-measures/motricity-index

42. Nine-Hole Peg Test. Shirely Ryan Abilitylab [online]. Chicago, 2014 [cit. 2019-05-10]. Dostupné z: https://www.sralab.org/rehabilitation-measures/nine-hole-peg-test

43. PANDIAN, S., ARYA, K.: Stroke-related motor outcome measures: Do they quantify the neurophysiological aspects of upper extremity recovery?. Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies., roč. 18, 2015, č. 3, s. 412-423

44. PEDERSEN, J., KAAE KRISTENSEN, H.: A critical discourse analysis of the attitudes of occupational therapists and physiotherapists towards the systematic use of standardised outcome measurement. Disability and Rehabilitation., roč. 38, 2015, č. 16, s. 1592-1602

45. PETTERSSON, I., PETTERSSON, V., FRISK., M.: ICF from an occupational therapy perspective in adult care: an integrative literature review. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy., roč. 19, 2012, č. 3, s. 260-273

46. PIKE, S., LANNIN, N., WALES, K., CUSICK, A.: A systematic review of the psychometric properties of the Action Research Arm Test in neurorehabilitation. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal., roč. 65, 2018, č. 5, s. 449-471

47. PLATZ, T., PINKOWSKI, C., VAN WIJCK F., KIM, I., DI BELLA, P., JOHNSON, G.: Reliability and validity of arm function assessment with standardized guidelines for the Fugl-Meyer Test, Action Research Arm Test and Box and Block Test: a multicentre study. Clinical Rehabilitation., roč. 19, 2016, č. 4, s. 404-411

48. POOLE, J., WHITNEY, S.: Assessments of motor function post stroke. physical & occupational therapy in geriatrics., roč. 19, 2009, č. 2, s. 1-22

49. ROMLI, M., WAN YUNUS, F., MACKENZIE, L.: Overview of reviews of standardised occupation-based instruments for use in occupational therapy practice. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal., 2019

50. SCHONEVELD, K., WITTINK, H., TAKKEN, T.: Clinimetric evaluation of measurement tools used in hand therapy to assess activity and participation. Journal of Hand Therapy., roč. 22, 2009, č. 3, s. 221-236

51. Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement. Shirely Ryan Abilitylab [online]. Chicago, 2016 [cit. 2019-05-12]. Dostupné z: https://www.sralab.org/rehabilitation-measures/stroke-rehabilitation-assessment-movement-measure

52. Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement. Scale Library [online]. 2019 [cit. 2019-05-20]. Dostupné z: http://scale-library.com/pdf/Stroke_Rehabilitation_Assessment_of_Movement_STREAM.pdf

53. TAUB, E., MORRIS, D., CRAGO, J.: Wolf Motor Function Test manual. In: . University of Alabama at Birmingham: UAB CI Therapy Research Group, 2011, s. 1 - 31

54. THRASHER, T., ZIVANOVIC, V., MCILROY, W., POPOVIC, M.: Rehabilitation of reaching and grasping function in severe hemiplegic patients using functional electrical stimulation therapy. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair., roč. 22, 2008, č. 6, s. 706-714

55. VAN DER LEE, J., DE GROOT, V., BECKERMAN, H., WAGENAAR, R., LANKHORST, G., BOUTER, L.: The intra- and interrater reliability of the action research arm test: A practical test of upper extremity function in patients with stroke. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil., roč. 82, 2001, č. 1, s. 14-19

56. VAN WEGEN, E., NIJLAND, R., VERBUNT, J., VAN WIJK, R., VAN KORDELAAR, J., KWAKKEL, G.: A comparison of two validated tests for upper limb function after stroke: The Wolf Motor Function Test and the Action Research Arm Test. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine., roč. 42, 2010, č. 7, s. 694-696

57. VELOZO, C., WOODBURY, M.: Translating measurement findings into rehabilitation practice: An example using Fugl-Meyer Assessment-Upper Extremity with patients following stroke. The Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development., roč. 48, 2011, č. 10

58. VYSKOTOVÁ, J., MACHÁČKOVÁ, K.: Jemná motorika: vývoj, motorická kontrola, hodnocení a testování. Praha: Grada, 2013

59. WILLIAMS, M., HADLER, N., EARP, J.: Manual ability as a marker of dependency in geriatric women. Journal of chronic diseases., roč. 35, 1982, č. 2, s. 115 - 122

60. WOLF, S., THOMPSON, P., MORRIS, D., ROSE, D., WINSTEIN, C., TAUB, E., GIULIANI, C., PEARSON, S.: The excite trial: attributes of the Wolf Motor Function Test in patients with subacute stroke. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair., roč. 19, 2005, č. 3, s. 194-205

61. WOODBURY, M., VELOZO, C., RICHARDS, L., DUNCAN, P., STUDENSKI, S., LAI, S.: Longitudinal stability of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment of the upper extremity. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil., roč. 89, 2008, č. 8, s. 1563-1569

62. World health organization. Towards a Common Language for Functioning, Disability and Health ICF. World Health Organization. Geneva, 2002

63. YANCOSEK, K., HOWELL, D.: A narrative review of dexterity assessments. Journal of hand therapy., roč. 22, 2009, č. 3, s. 258-270

Labels

Physiotherapist, university degree Rehabilitation Sports medicine

The Effect of Tibial Osteotomy on the Gait Kinematics in Patients with Knee Arthritis - Pilot Study

Possible Application of Pilates Exercise in Multiple Sclerosis Patients

Interconnection of Physiotherapy and Psychology in Sport

Physical Therapy and Recovery Techniques in Elite-Level Female Floorball in the Czech Republic

The Eeffect of Perfection of Motion Paradigm on Activation of Selected Muscles in an Open and Closed Kinematic Chain

Article was published in

Rehabilitation and Physical Medicine

2019 Issue 3