4.6 Article

Standardized Measurement of Quality of Upper Limb Movement After Stroke: Consensus-Based Core Recommendations From the Second Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable

期刊

NEUROREHABILITATION AND NEURAL REPAIR
卷 33, 期 11, 页码 951-958

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/1545968319886477

关键词

Stroke; rehabilitation; biomechanics; measurement; upper extremity; recovery; consensus

资金

  1. Ipsen Pharma
  2. Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) CaSTOR (Canadian Stroke Trials for Optimized Results) Group
  3. Heart and Stroke Canadian Partnership for Stroke Recovery
  4. NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Stroke Rehabilitation and Brain Recovery

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The second Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable metrics task force developed consensus around the recognized need to add kinematic and kinetic movement quantification to its core recommendations for standardized measurements of sensorimotor recovery in stroke trials. Specifically, we focused on measurement of the quality of upper limb movement. We agreed that the recommended protocols for measurement should be conceptually rigorous, reliable, valid and responsive to change. The recommended measurement protocols include four performance assays (i.e. 2D planar reaching, finger individuation, grip strength, and precision grip at body function level) and one functional task (3D drinking task at activity level) that address body function and activity respectively. This document describes the criteria for assessment and makes recommendations about the type of technology that should be used for reliable and valid movement capture. Standardization of kinematic measurement protocols will allow pooling of participant data across sites, thereby increasing sample size aiding meta-analyses of published trials, more detailed exploration of recovery profiles, the generation of new research questions with testable hypotheses, and development of new treatment approaches focused on impairment. We urge the clinical and research community to consider adopting these recommendations.

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

4.6
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