I-Ping Hsueh1, Ching-Lin Hsieh. 1. School of Occupational Therapy, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, ROC.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the responsiveness of the Action Research Arm test (ARAT) and the upper extremity section of the Motor Assessment Scale (UE-MAS) in assessing the recovery of upper extremity function in stroke inpatients receiving rehabilitation. SUBJECTS: Forty-eight stroke inpatients. SETTING: The physical medicine and rehabilitation department of a medical centre. DESIGN: The patients were tested at admission and at discharge from the department. METHODS: Various indices, including effect size d, Wilcoxon test and Spearman's rho, were used to assess responsiveness. The change in score of the upper extremity subscale of the Fugl-Meyer scale was used as the external criterion. RESULTS: The responsiveness indices of both total scores of the ARAT and UE-MAS are generally moderate and similar (d = 0.52, Wilcoxon Z = 5.03, p < 0.001 and rho = 0.66 for the ARAT; d = 0.45, Z = 4.54, p < 0.001 and rho = 0.7 for the UE-MAS). Responsiveness indices are small to moderate and similar in each of the subscales of both instruments. CONCLUSION: The results of this study support the value of the ARAT and UE-MAS for measuring recovery of upper extremity function in stroke patients.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the responsiveness of the Action Research Arm test (ARAT) and the upper extremity section of the Motor Assessment Scale (UE-MAS) in assessing the recovery of upper extremity function in stroke inpatients receiving rehabilitation. SUBJECTS: Forty-eight stroke inpatients. SETTING: The physical medicine and rehabilitation department of a medical centre. DESIGN: The patients were tested at admission and at discharge from the department. METHODS: Various indices, including effect size d, Wilcoxon test and Spearman's rho, were used to assess responsiveness. The change in score of the upper extremity subscale of the Fugl-Meyer scale was used as the external criterion. RESULTS: The responsiveness indices of both total scores of the ARAT and UE-MAS are generally moderate and similar (d = 0.52, Wilcoxon Z = 5.03, p < 0.001 and rho = 0.66 for the ARAT; d = 0.45, Z = 4.54, p < 0.001 and rho = 0.7 for the UE-MAS). Responsiveness indices are small to moderate and similar in each of the subscales of both instruments. CONCLUSION: The results of this study support the value of the ARAT and UE-MAS for measuring recovery of upper extremity function in strokepatients.
Authors: Sophie Wang; C Janice Hsu; Lauren Trent; Tiffany Ryan; Nathan T Kearns; Eugene F Civillico; Kimberly L Kontson Journal: PM R Date: 2018-02-21 Impact factor: 2.298
Authors: Kathryn S Hayward; Julia Schmidt; Keith R Lohse; Sue Peters; Julie Bernhardt; Natasha A Lannin; Lara A Boyd Journal: Neuroimage Clin Date: 2016-09-24 Impact factor: 4.881