4.6 Article

Psychometric Comparisons of 2 Versions of the Fugl-Meyer Motor Scale and 2 Versions of the Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement

期刊

NEUROREHABILITATION AND NEURAL REPAIR
卷 22, 期 6, 页码 737-744

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/1545968308315999

关键词

Stroke; Motor recovery; Outcome measures; Psychometrics

资金

  1. National Science Council [NSC95-2314-B-037-068]
  2. National Health Research Institute [NHRIEX95-9512PI]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. To provide empirical justification for selecting motor scales for stroke patients, the authors compared the psychometric properties (validity, responsiveness, test-retest reliability, and smallest real difference [SRD]) of the Fugl-Meyer Motor Scale (FM), the simplified FM (S-FM), the Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement instrument (STREAM), and the simplified STREAM (S-STREAM). Methods. For the validity and responsiveness study, 50 inpatients were assessed with the FM and the STREAM at admission and discharge to a rehabilitation department. The scores of the S-FM and the S-STREAM were retrieved from their corresponding scales. For the test-retest reliability study, a therapist administered both scales on a different sample of 60 chronic patients on 2 occasions. Results. Only the S-STREAM had no notable floor or ceiling effects at admission and discharge. The 4 motor scales had good concurrent validity (rho >= .91) and satisfactory predictive validity (rho = .72-.77). The scales showed responsiveness (effect size d >= 0.34; standardized response mean >= 0.95; P < .0001), with the S-STREAM most responsive. The test-retest agreements of the scales were excellent (intraclass correlation coefficients >=.96). The SRD of the 4 scales was 10% of their corresponding highest score, indicating acceptable level of measurement error. The upper extremity and the lower extremity subscales of the 4 showed similar results. Conclusions. The 4 motor scales showed acceptable levels of reliability, validity, and responsiveness in stroke patients. The S-STREAM is recommended because it is short, responsive to change, and able to discriminate patients with severe or mild stroke.

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