BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory (CAHAI) is a new, validated upper-limb measure that uses a 7-point quantitative scale in order to assess functional recovery of the arm and hand after a stroke. The purposes of this study were: (1) to determine whether the longitudinal validity of scores on 2 versions of a new upper-limb measure, the CAHAI (CAHAI-9 and CAHAI-13), was greater than that of scores on the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) and (2) to determine whether the cross-sectional and longitudinal validity of the CAHAI-13 scores was greater than that of the CAHAI-9 scores. SUBJECTS: One hundred five people with upper-limb dysfunction following a stroke were stratified into 2 impairment groups (mild to moderate and severe), which were expected to change by different amounts. METHODS: The CAHAI-13 and ARAT were administered twice (time between assessments varied from 2 to 6 weeks). Receiver operating characteristic curves, Pearson product moment coefficient of correlation, and regression analyses were used. RESULTS: Receiver operating characteristic curve areas (CAHAI-13=0.86, CAHAI-9=0.82, ARAT=0.72) were significantly greater for the CAHAI versions. Scores on both CAHAI versions had identical levels of cross-sectional validity. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Both CAHAI versions demonstrated more sensitivity to change than the ARAT. It remains unclear whether the CAHAI-9 provides precise estimates of CAHAI-13 scores at the individual level.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory (CAHAI) is a new, validated upper-limb measure that uses a 7-point quantitative scale in order to assess functional recovery of the arm and hand after a stroke. The purposes of this study were: (1) to determine whether the longitudinal validity of scores on 2 versions of a new upper-limb measure, the CAHAI (CAHAI-9 and CAHAI-13), was greater than that of scores on the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) and (2) to determine whether the cross-sectional and longitudinal validity of the CAHAI-13 scores was greater than that of the CAHAI-9 scores. SUBJECTS: One hundred five people with upper-limb dysfunction following a stroke were stratified into 2 impairment groups (mild to moderate and severe), which were expected to change by different amounts. METHODS: The CAHAI-13 and ARAT were administered twice (time between assessments varied from 2 to 6 weeks). Receiver operating characteristic curves, Pearson product moment coefficient of correlation, and regression analyses were used. RESULTS: Receiver operating characteristic curve areas (CAHAI-13=0.86, CAHAI-9=0.82, ARAT=0.72) were significantly greater for the CAHAI versions. Scores on both CAHAI versions had identical levels of cross-sectional validity. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Both CAHAI versions demonstrated more sensitivity to change than the ARAT. It remains unclear whether the CAHAI-9 provides precise estimates of CAHAI-13 scores at the individual level.
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: Hussein A Abdullah; Cole Tarry; Cynthia Lambert; Susan Barreca; Brian O Allen Journal: J Neuroeng Rehabil Date: 2011-08-26 Impact factor: 4.262
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