BACKGROUND: The Action Research Arm (ARA) test is a performance test of upper extremity motor function which consists of 19 items divided into four hierarchical subtests. This multidimensionality has not yet been tested empirically. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the dimensionality of the ARA test. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study involving a sample of 63 chronic stroke patients. METHODS: A Mokken scale analysis was performed. RESULTS: The Mokken scale analysis revealed one strong unidimensional scale containing all 19 items, of which the scalability coefficient H was 0.79, while H per item ranged from 0.69 to 0.86. The reliability coefficient rho equalled 0.98, indicating a very high internal consistency. A subset of 15 out of 19 items showed an invariant hierarchical item-ordering. CONCLUSION: The ARA test is a unidimensional scale. The use of subtests, as proposed in the original description of the instrument, is not supported by the present findings. The 15-item scale presented here can be used for adaptive testing, i.e. using only a selected subset of items based on prior knowledge about the patient's abilities, thus minimizing testing time.
BACKGROUND: The Action Research Arm (ARA) test is a performance test of upper extremity motor function which consists of 19 items divided into four hierarchical subtests. This multidimensionality has not yet been tested empirically. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the dimensionality of the ARA test. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study involving a sample of 63 chronic strokepatients. METHODS: A Mokken scale analysis was performed. RESULTS: The Mokken scale analysis revealed one strong unidimensional scale containing all 19 items, of which the scalability coefficient H was 0.79, while H per item ranged from 0.69 to 0.86. The reliability coefficient rho equalled 0.98, indicating a very high internal consistency. A subset of 15 out of 19 items showed an invariant hierarchical item-ordering. CONCLUSION: The ARA test is a unidimensional scale. The use of subtests, as proposed in the original description of the instrument, is not supported by the present findings. The 15-item scale presented here can be used for adaptive testing, i.e. using only a selected subset of items based on prior knowledge about the patient's abilities, thus minimizing testing time.
Authors: Steven L Wolf; Komal Sahu; R Curtis Bay; Sharon Buchanan; Aimee Reiss; Susan Linder; Anson Rosenfeldt; Jay Alberts Journal: Neurorehabil Neural Repair Date: 2015-03-17 Impact factor: 3.919
Authors: Mary Ellen Stoykov; Olivia M Biller; Alexandra Wax; Erin King; Jacob M Schauer; Louis F Fogg; Daniel M Corcos Journal: Trials Date: 2022-06-22 Impact factor: 2.728
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: Eline C C van Lieshout; Julia Boonzaier; Adam J Pel; Caroline L van Heijningen; Jord J Vink; Johanna M A Visser-Meily; Geralda A F van Tilborg; Rick M Dijkhuizen Journal: Neurorehabil Neural Repair Date: 2021-04-07 Impact factor: 3.919
Authors: Catherine E Lang; Marghuretta D Bland; Ryan R Bailey; Sydney Y Schaefer; Rebecca L Birkenmeier Journal: J Hand Ther Date: 2012-09-10 Impact factor: 1.908
Authors: Gert Kwakkel; Carel G M Meskers; Erwin E van Wegen; Guus J Lankhorst; Alexander C H Geurts; Annet A van Kuijk; Eline Lindeman; Anne Visser-Meily; Erwin de Vlugt; J Hans Arendzen Journal: BMC Neurol Date: 2008-12-17 Impact factor: 2.474