4.2 Article

Upper Extremity Function in Stroke Subjects: Relationships between the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health Domains

期刊

JOURNAL OF HAND THERAPY
卷 24, 期 3, 页码 257-264

出版社

HANLEY & BELFUS-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jht.2011.01.002

关键词

-

资金

  1. Brazilian Government Funding Agency, Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento a Pesquisa
  2. Brazilian Government Funding Agency, Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa de Minas Gerais

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Upper limb (UL) impairments are the most common disabling deficits after stroke and have complex relationships with activity and participation domains. However, relatively few studies have applied the ICF model to identify the contributions of specific UL impairments, such as muscular weakness, pain, and sensory loss, as predictors of activity and participation. The purposes of this predictive study were to evaluate the relationships between UL variables related to body functions/structures, activity, and participation domains and to determine which would best explain activity and participation with 55 subjects with chronic stroke. Body functions/structures were assessed by measures of grip, pinch, and UL strength, finger tactile sensations, shoulder pain, and cognition (MMSE); activity domain by measures of observed performance (BBT, NHPT, and TEMPA); and participation by measures of quality of life (SSQOL). Upper-limb and grip strength were related to all activity measures (0.52 < r <0.82, p <.0001). Shoulder pain (r = -.39,p <.001) was the variable which was mostly related to participation. Grip strength alone accounted for 62%, 54%, and 36% of the variance in the activity measures (respectively TEMPA, BBT and NHPT). Shoulder pain accounted for 30% of the participation measure. Strength deficits and shoulder pain of the paretic UL demonstrated to be important targets for clinical interventions to improve activity and participation with chronic stroke subjects.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据