4.5 Article

Development of the Assisting Hand Assessment for adolescents (Ad-AHA) and validation of the AHA from 18 months to 18 years

Journal

DEVELOPMENTAL MEDICINE AND CHILD NEUROLOGY
Volume 58, Issue 12, Pages 1303-1309

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/dmcn.13168

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Stichting Rotterdams Kinderrevalidatie Fonds Adriaanstichting
  2. Johanna KinderFonds (the Netherlands)
  3. Stiftelsen Frimurare-Barnhuset
  4. Strategic Research Funding for Health Care Science (SFO-V)
  5. Norrbacka-Eugenia Stiftelsen (Sweden)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

AimTo develop and evaluate a test activity from which bimanual performance in adolescents with unilateral cerebral palsy (CP) can be observed and scored with the Assisting Hand Assessment (AHA), and to evaluate the construct validity of the AHA test items for the extended age range 18 months to 18 years. MethodA new test activity was developed and evaluated for its ability to elicit bimanual actions in adolescents with (n=20) and without (n=10) unilateral CP. The AHA scores of 126 adolescents (mean age 14y 3mo, SD 2y 6mo; 71 males, 55 females) and 157 children with unilateral CP (mean age 6y 1mo, SD 2y 10mo; 102 males, 55 females) were analysed using the Rasch measurement model. ResultsThe test activity elicited bimanual actions in 100% of typically developing adolescents and in 96.8% and 57.9% of adolescents with unilateral CP (moderately and severely limited hand function respectively). The scale demonstrated good construct validity; thus the same scoring criteria can be used for the age range studied. InterpretationThe new Assisting Hand Assessment for adolescents (Ad-AHA) activity is valid for use with 13- to 18-year-olds to elicit bimanual performance in adolescents with unilateral CP. The same AHA scoring criteria can be used both for children and for adolescents within the age range 18 months to 18 years.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available