Reliability and validity of arm function assessment with standardized guidelines for the Fugl-Meyer Test, Action Research Arm Test and Box and Block Test: a multicentre study

Platz, Thomas; Pinkowski, Cosima; Wijck, Frederike van; Kim, In-Ha; Bella, P. Di; Johnson, Garth

doi:10.1191/0269215505cr832oa

Cited by 733 publications

(565 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

541

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As far as we know, most research on the concurrent validity and responsiveness of the FMA has looked at the upper extremity functions. Motion function was highly correlated with the action research arm test (ARAT) and the box and block test (r= 0.925 and 0.921, respectively) 18) , and van der Lee et al reported that intensive treatment for 22 chronic stroke patients' upper extremity functions gave a responsiveness ratio of 0.41 19) .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Jebsen-Taylor hand function test, the grip power test 10,11) , the Action Reach Arm Test (ARAT) 12) , the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) 13) , the Motor Assessment Scale (MAS) 14) , and the FMA 1) which include domains such as motor function and balance, sensation qualities, passive range of motion, and joint pain are the most widely used [15][16][17] . Research on the reliability and validity of the FMA has been conducted, but the majority of the research has only examined reliability and validity in one or two domains, not all the domains, or either of the upper or lower extremity 2,18,19) . Michaelsen et al reported that the FMA has a reasonable reliability for total motor scores of the upper extremity (ICC=0.98), lower extremity (ICC = 0.90), movement sense (ICC = 0.98), upper and lower extremities' passive range of motion (ICC=0.84 and 0.90, respectively), and tactile sensitivity (ICC =0.75) however, they had only evaluated the inter-rater reliability 20) .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reliability, Concurrent Validity, and Responsiveness of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) for Hemiplegic Patients

Kim

Her

et al. 2012

J Phys Ther Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.[Purpose] The purpose of this study was to determine the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) for hemiplegic patients.[Subjects] For the reliability and validity study, 50 patients with stroke (26 males, 24 females) were recruited. For the responsiveness study, 16 hemiplegic patients (8 males, 8 females) participated.[Methods] Two physical therapists and one occupational therapist rated 50 video recordings of hemiplegic patients using the FMA to test the inter-rater reliability, and one physical therapist (rater A) rated each of the 50 video clips on two occasions, two weeks apart, to evaluate the test-retest reliability. Responsiveness was calculated three months after the baseline assessment. Reliability was calculated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), and smallest real difference (SRD). Concurrent validity was examined using Pearson's correlation coefficient and responsiveness was calculated using the effect size (ES) and standardized response mean (SRM).[Results] Assessment using the FMA showed high relative reliability, and the absolute reliability was satisfactory for the inter-rater and test-retest reliabilities. The correlations between motor function of the FMA and the Jebsen-Taylor hand function, grip power, motor assessment scale (MAS), and the Berg balance scale (BBS) were moderate to good, and were highly significant (p<0.05), while responsiveness was moderate to large. [Conclusion] The results indicate that the FMA is a reasonable assessment of the function of the upper and lower extremities of patient with stroke.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability, Concurrent Validity, and Responsiveness of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) for Hemiplegic Patients

Kim

Her

et al. 2012

J Phys Ther Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Participants sat in front of a box, which was divided into two rectangles of the same area, and were asked to move as many 2.5 cm-sized wood blocks to the empty space as they could within 60 seconds. The test-retest reliability r was 0.98 [Chen, Chen, Hsueh, Huang, & Hsieh, 2009], and the inter-tester reliability [Platz, et al, 2005].…”

Section: Outcome Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Mirror Therapy on Functional Recovery of Upper Extremity after Stroke: A Randomized Pilot Study

Kim¹,

Lee²

2017

J Exp Stroke Transl Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Object: The purpose of this study is to confirm the effect of mirror therapy on motor recovery of upper extremity and to suggest a standard mirror therapy program for stroke patients. Method:Total 19 chronic stroke patients participate in this study and were randomly divided in two groups mirror therapy group and sham therapy group randomly. The participants of received during 30-minutes, 5 times per week for 4 weeks. The muscle strength, range of motion and muscle tone, grip strength, manual dexterity, functional independence levels were evaluated for compare of effects after interventions. Result:The mirror therapy group showed significant differences in muscle strength and range of motion of wrist extension, muscle tone of wrist flexor compare to sham therapy group as revealed by electric muscle test Dualer IQ Inclinometer and Modified Ashworth Scale (p<0.05). And the mirror therapy group showed significant improvement in grip strength, manual dexterity, functional independence levels compare to sham therapy group as revealed by electro dynamometer, Box and Block Test and functional Independence Measure( p<0.05). Conclusion:The mirror therapy can bring positive changes for motor recovery of upper extremity, the mirror therapy program in this study is effective for functional recovery of upper extremity after stroke.

show abstract

“…The BB consists of a box with a center partition [18][19][20]. Small wooden blocks were placed in one side of the box, and the subject was asked to use the prosthetic terminal device to grasp one block at a time, transport it over the partition, and release it.…”

Section: Outcome Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Outcome measures of activity performance included four performancebased measures: the Modified Box and Block Test of Manual Dexterity (BB) [18][19][20], the Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test (JTHF) [21], the Activities Measure for Upper-Limb Amputees (AM-ULA) [22], the University of New Brunswick Test of Prosthetic Function for Unilateral Amputees (UNB) [23]; and two self-report measures: the Upper-Extremity Functional Scale (UEFS) from the Orthotics and Prosthetics Users Survey [24][25] and the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) [26]. All performance-based measures were administered by OTs.…”

Section: Outcome Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-reported and performance-based outcomes using DEKA Arm

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Mechanical properties of the DEKA Arm and associated engineering innovations are easy to observe. What is less clear is how these advances translate into functional benefits for the user with amputation. Study aims were to (1) quantify outcomes including dexterity, performance of daily activities, and prosthetic skill and spontaneity of users of the DEKA Arm and (2) compare outcomes when using the DEKA Arm with scores using the existing prosthesis. This was a quasi-experimental study. Descriptive analyses examined outcomes by DEKA Arm configuration level. Of the 39 subjects fit with a DEKA Arm, 32 were trained in use and completed end-of-study testing. Data from 26 prosthetic users were used to compare outcomes using existing prostheses with outcomes with the DEKA Arm. Dexterity and activity performance with the DEKA Arm varied by amputation level (p < 0.01). Self-reported function and number of activities performed using the prosthesis were similar across levels. Comparisons with existing prostheses showed the effect on dexterity varied by level. Activity performance and spontaneity of prosthetic use improved for users of the shoulder configuration level, while use of the prosthesis to perform activities and perceived difficulty performing self-selected tasks improved for all levels.

show abstract

Reliability and validity of arm function assessment with standardized guidelines for the Fugl-Meyer Test, Action Research Arm Test and Box and Block Test: a multicentre study

Abstract: The standardized guidelines assured comparability of test administration and scoring across clinical facilities. The arm motor scales provided information that was not identical to information from the Hemispheric Stroke Scale or the Modified Barthel Index.

Cited by 733 publications

References 20 publications

Reliability, Concurrent Validity, and Responsiveness of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) for Hemiplegic Patients

Reliability, Concurrent Validity, and Responsiveness of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) for Hemiplegic Patients

The Effect of Mirror Therapy on Functional Recovery of Upper Extremity after Stroke: A Randomized Pilot Study

Self-reported and performance-based outcomes using DEKA Arm

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About