Literature DB >> 29474995

Evaluation of Performance-Based Outcome Measures for the Upper Limb: A Comprehensive Narrative Review.

Sophie Wang1, C Janice Hsu2, Lauren Trent3, Tiffany Ryan4, Nathan T Kearns5, Eugene F Civillico6, Kimberly L Kontson7.   

Abstract

Objective performance-based outcome measures (OMs) have the potential to provide unbiased and reproducible assessments of limb function. However, very few of these performance-based OMs have been validated for upper limb (UL) prosthesis users. OMs validated in other clinical populations (eg, neurologic or musculoskeletal conditions) could be used to fill gaps in existing performance-based OMs for UL amputees. Additionally, a joint review might reveal consistent gaps across multiple clinical populations. Therefore, the objective of this review was to systematically characterize prominent measures used in both sets of clinical populations with regard to (1) location of task performance around the body, (2) possible grips employed, (3) bilateral versus unilateral task participation, and (4) details of scoring mechanisms. A systematic literature search was conducted in EMBASE, Medline, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health electronic databases for variations of the following terms: stroke, musculoskeletal dysfunction, amputation, prosthesis, upper limb, outcome, assessments. Articles were included if they described performance-based OMs developed for disabilities of the UL. Results show most tasks were performed with 1 hand in the space directly in front of the participant. The tip, tripod, and cylindrical grips were most commonly used for the specific tasks. Few measures assessed sensation and movement quality. Overall, several limitations in OMs were identified. The solution to these limitations may be to modify and validate existing measures originally developed for other clinical populations as first steps to more aptly measure prosthesis use while more complete assessments for UL prosthesis users are being developed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
Copyright © 2018 American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29474995      PMCID: PMC6206495          DOI: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2018.02.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PM R        ISSN: 1934-1482            Impact factor:   2.298


  65 in total

Review 1.  Upper limb prosthesis use and abandonment: a survey of the last 25 years.

Authors:  Elaine A Biddiss; Tom T Chau
Journal:  Prosthet Orthot Int       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 1.895

2.  Assessment of capacity for myoelectric control: evaluation of construct and rating scale.

Authors:  Helen Y N Lindner; John M Linacre; Liselotte M Norling Hermansson
Journal:  J Rehabil Med       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 2.912

3.  Assessing arm and hand function after stroke: a validity test of the hierarchical scoring system used in the motor assessment scale for stroke.

Authors:  Joyce S Sabari; Ai Lian Lim; Craig A Velozo; Leigh Lehman; Owen Kieran; Jin-Shei Lai
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 3.966

4.  Test-retest reliability, validity, and sensitivity of the Chedoke arm and hand activity inventory: a new measure of upper-limb function for survivors of stroke.

Authors:  Susan R Barreca; Paul W Stratford; Cynthia L Lambert; Lisa M Masters; David L Streiner
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 3.966

5.  Measuring upper limb capacity in patients after stroke: reliability and validity of the stroke upper limb capacity scale.

Authors:  Annemieke Houwink; Leo D Roorda; Wendy Smits; Ivo W Molenaar; Alexander C Geurts
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2011-07-29       Impact factor: 3.966

6.  Longitudinal stability of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment of the upper extremity.

Authors:  Michelle L Woodbury; Craig A Velozo; Lorie G Richards; Pamela W Duncan; Stephanie Studenski; Sue-Min Lai
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 3.966

7.  Reliability of the Fugl-Meyer assessment for testing motor performance in patients following stroke.

Authors:  J Sanford; J Moreland; L R Swanson; P W Stratford; C Gowland
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  1993-07

8.  An introductory study of common grasps used by adults during performance of activities of daily living.

Authors:  Margarita Vergara; J L Sancho-Bru; V Gracia-Ibáñez; A Pérez-González
Journal:  J Hand Ther       Date:  2014-04-21       Impact factor: 1.950

9.  Improving the Action Research Arm test: a unidimensional hierarchical scale.

Authors:  Johanna H van der Lee; Leo D Roorda; Heleen Beckerman; Gustaaf J Lankhorst; Lex M Bouter
Journal:  Clin Rehabil       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 3.477

10.  Learning to use a body-powered prosthesis: changes in functionality and kinematics.

Authors:  Laura H B Huinink; Hanneke Bouwsema; Dick H Plettenburg; Corry K van der Sluis; Raoul M Bongers
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2016-10-07       Impact factor: 4.262

View more
  11 in total

1.  The Effect of Narrative Nursing Intervention on Shame in Elderly Patients with Bladder Cancer after Ileal Bladder Replacement: A Cohort Study.

Authors:  Lang Wang; Dan Wu; Shufang Wu; Ya Liu; Xiaoxi Tan; Yun Liu; Ziyuan Wu; Qian Wang; Xiachan He
Journal:  Comput Math Methods Med       Date:  2022-06-30       Impact factor: 2.809

2.  Quantitative Eye Gaze and Movement Differences in Visuomotor Adaptations to Varying Task Demands Among Upper-Extremity Prosthesis Users.

Authors:  Jacqueline S Hebert; Quinn A Boser; Aïda M Valevicius; Hiroki Tanikawa; Ewen B Lavoie; Albert H Vette; Patrick M Pilarski; Craig S Chapman
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2019-09-04

3.  Improving bimanual interaction with a prosthesis using semi-autonomous control.

Authors:  Robin Volkmar; Strahinja Dosen; Jose Gonzalez-Vargas; Marcus Baum; Marko Markovic
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2019-11-14       Impact factor: 4.262

4.  The Merits of Dynamic Data Acquisition for Realistic Myocontrol.

Authors:  Andrea Gigli; Arjan Gijsberts; Claudio Castellini
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2020-04-30

5.  Comparison of DEKA Arm and Body-Powered Upper Limb Prosthesis Joint Kinematics.

Authors:  Conor Bloomer; Kimberly L Kontson
Journal:  Arch Rehabil Res Clin Transl       Date:  2020-04-25

6.  Application of machine learning to the identification of joint degrees of freedom involved in abnormal movement during upper limb prosthesis use.

Authors:  Sophie L Wang; Conor Bloomer; Gene Civillico; Kimberly Kontson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-02-11       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  3-Dimensional printing in rehabilitation: feasibility of printing an upper extremity gross motor function assessment tool.

Authors:  Naaz Kapadia; Mathew Myers; Kristin Musselman; Rosalie H Wang; Aaron Yurkewich; Milos R Popovic
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2021-01-05       Impact factor: 2.819

8.  Effect of multi-grip myoelectric prosthetic hands on daily activities, pain-related disability and prosthesis use compared with single-grip myoelectric prostheses: A single-case study.

Authors:  Cathrine Widehammar; Ayako Hiyoshi; Kajsa Lidström Holmqvist; Helen Lindner; Liselotte Hermansson
Journal:  J Rehabil Med       Date:  2022-01-03       Impact factor: 2.912

9.  Comparison of Motion Analysis Systems in Tracking Upper Body Movement of Myoelectric Bypass Prosthesis Users.

Authors:  Sophie L Wang; Gene Civillico; Wesley Niswander; Kimberly L Kontson
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-12       Impact factor: 3.847

10.  A novel framework for designing a multi-DoF prosthetic wrist control using machine learning.

Authors:  Chinmay P Swami; Nicholas Lenhard; Jiyeon Kang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-07-22       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.