Maximal lateral reaching distance on the affected side using the multi-directional reach test in persons with stroke

Abstract

[Purpose] This study aimed to examine the relationship between maximal lateral reaching distance on the affected side and weight shifting using the Multi-directional Reach Test in persons with stoke. [Subjects] Fifty-one chronic stroke participants were recruited from two rehabilitation hospitals. This study administered the Berg Balance Scale, Timed Up-and-Go, Trunk Impairment Scale, Modified Barthel Index and measured different maximal reaching distances. [Results] The maximal lateral reaching distance on the affected side was correlated with the BBS (r=0.571), TUG (r=−0.478), TIS (r=0.561), and MBI scores (r=0.499), the lateral reaching distance in all directions on the non-affected side (r=0.785), the maximal backward reaching distance (r=0.723), and the maximal forward reaching distance (r=0.673). The maximal reaching distance on the affected side was also affected by that on the non-affected side, in addition to the maximal backward reaching distance and MBI score. The final step model of stepwise multiple regression was explained 69.5%. [Conclusion] Maximal lateral reaching distance on the affected side as determined by the Multi-directional Reach Test is a good method of assessing functional performance in stroke patients. Data regarding maximal reaching distance on the non-affected side can be used to measure functional impairment on the affected side in clinical settings.

Modified Functional Reach Test: Upper-Body Kinematics and Muscular Activity in Chronic Stroke Survivors

“…Instead, the TUG outcome is an objective, continuous parameter (as it measures the time) [ 32 ]. Nevertheless, [ 55 ] found a correlation between TIS and the reaching distance in the affected side in stroke survivors, but while performing the (standing) functional reach test.…”

“…Hwang and colleagues [ 55 ] suggested that, in stroke survivors, the kinematic results of the (standing) functional reach test along the contra and ipsilesional directions are correlated. In this study, we focused on the modified functional reach test in two directions.…”

Oblique direction reach test: evaluating psychometric properties in stroke population

“…However, the application of this instrument is not feasible because the equipment needed is expensive and sophisticated. However, the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), the Time Up and Go (TUG), the Tinetti POMA scale, the Multidirection Reach Test (MDRT), the Lateral Reach Test (LRT), and the Functional Reach Test (FRT) are additional clinical measures that assess balance ( Lin et al, 2004 ; Blum & Korner-Bitensky, 2008 ; Canbek et al, 2013 ; Hwang et al, 2015 ). Among these tests, LRT, MDRT, and FRT are the most feasible tests because they can be done quickly and do not require any use of any complex or expensive equipment ( Duncan et al, 1990 ; Newton, 2001 ; Katz-Leurer et al, 2009 ; Deshmukh, Ganesan & Tedla, 2011 ; Hwang et al, 2015 ).…”

“…However, the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), the Time Up and Go (TUG), the Tinetti POMA scale, the Multidirection Reach Test (MDRT), the Lateral Reach Test (LRT), and the Functional Reach Test (FRT) are additional clinical measures that assess balance ( Lin et al, 2004 ; Blum & Korner-Bitensky, 2008 ; Canbek et al, 2013 ; Hwang et al, 2015 ). Among these tests, LRT, MDRT, and FRT are the most feasible tests because they can be done quickly and do not require any use of any complex or expensive equipment ( Duncan et al, 1990 ; Newton, 2001 ; Katz-Leurer et al, 2009 ; Deshmukh, Ganesan & Tedla, 2011 ; Hwang et al, 2015 ). FRT and LRT assess an individual’s potential to reach ahead or sideways, causing their center of mass (COM) to shift over a firm base of support (BOS), and assessing their ability to control their body ( Duncan et al, 1990 ; Newton, 2001 ; Katz-Leurer et al, 2009 ; Deshmukh, Ganesan & Tedla, 2011 ; Verheyden et al, 2011 ).…”

Postural optimization during functional reach while kneeling and standing

“…Functional reach (FR) is a very important motion because it is often performed in daily life. Furthermore, FR is used to evaluate postural control 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ) . Duncan et al developed the FR test to evaluate the limits of stability 1 ) .…”