The long-term outcome of arm function after stroke: results of a follow-up study

Broeks, J. G.; Lankhorst, Gustaaf J.; Rumping, K.; Prevo, A. J. H.

doi:10.1080/096382899297459

Cited by 599 publications

(399 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

376

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…If the cutoff value of shoulder pain is NRS≥5 points, it means that the pain is severe, and 20% of stroke patients suffer severe pain (NRS≥5 points) in the early stage of stroke 12) . In addition, a study of 54 stroke patients showed the same result 15) . Accordingly, the upper extremity function of the combination of shoulder external rotation and abduction can be utilized as an index of pain caused by everyday living activities and satisfaction with life.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 60%

“…It is reported to have high validity and sensitivity in the evaluation of the severity of pain of the elderly and stroke patients 20) . When functional movement of the upper extremities is performed in the HBN test, if shoulder pain is assessed as NRS≥5 points, it means that patients feel the pain with the inverse value of the probability of which the pain appears 12,15) . In the HBN test, it was reported that for a NRS≥5 in the determination of pain in a stable condition, the ROC curve is 0.845, Sensitivity is 96.7 and Specificity is 72.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular, the restriction of shoulder range of motion causes contracture of soft tissue 8) , and stroke patients with hemiplegic shoulder pain show histologic changes such as synovial hyper-vascularity 12) , cell growth, and leukocyte count increase around growth β factor, fibroblasts, and intracapsular blood vessels 13,14) . Intracapsular adhesion, especially restricts passive shoulder external rotation 15) , and causes 65% of stroke patients to suffer muscle weakening regardless of humeral degenerative changes in the recovery period after stroke 3) . Patients who have low muscle tone around the unaffected shoulder and hemiplegic shoulder are highly likely to be exposed to humeral joint instability and impingement syndrome 13,[16][17][18] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Study of the Clinical Utility of the BPI-12 and 23 in Predicting Shoulder Pain in Stroke Patients

Lee

Kim

2012

J Phys Ther Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. [Purpose] This study was designed to evaluate the clinical utility of the Brief Pain Inventory-12, 23 (BPI-12, 23) for predicting shoulder pain in stroke patients and to compare the functional ability of the BPI-12, 23 test to discriminate between subgroups with and without shoulder pain.[Subjects] The subjects were 62 persons who were chronic stroke survivors with shoulder pain.[Methods] The patients answered questions on shoulder pain using the BPI question 12 (BP1-12) and Pain-related Quality of life (BPI-23). Therapists measured the performance of combined upper-limb movements including the hand behind the neck (HBN) maneuver, and added passive painfree shoulder external rotation range of motion, and the Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) score of the elbow flexors. [Conclusion] The BPI-12 and 23 both have potential as screening tools for risk factors of shoulder pain. They can be performed during evaluation to increase the likelihood of determining those who complain of hemiplegic shoulder pain after stroke. However they first require confirmation in a prospective study.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 60%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Study of the Clinical Utility of the BPI-12 and 23 in Predicting Shoulder Pain in Stroke Patients

Lee

Kim

2012

J Phys Ther Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Agreement between the measurements of the logit values (i.e., parametric data) was evaluated by the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). Different subforms of ICCs are available for different study designs and the most commonly used are ICC 1,1 , ICC 2,1 and ICC 3,1 . In practice, their values are often very similar.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Test‐Retest Reliability of the ABILHAND Questionnaire in Persons With Chronic Stroke

Ekstrand

Lindgren

Lexell

et al. 2013

PM&R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundReliable and valid outcome measures are needed to be able to evaluate recovery, effects of rehabilitation interventions, and changes over time. The ABILHAND Questionnaire is a measure of a patient's self‐reported ability to perform complex daily activities involving use of the hand. This instrument is commonly used in stroke rehabilitation settings, but data about the measurement variability are missing.ObjectiveTo assess the test‐retest reliability of the ABILHAND Questionnaire in persons with chronic stroke and to define limits for the smallest change that indicates a real change, both for a group of individuals and for a single individual.DesignA test‐retest reliability study.SettingsUniversity hospital.ParticipantsA convenience sample of 43 persons (11 women and 32 men; mean age 64 years) with mild to moderate impairments of hand function 6‐48 months after sustaining a stroke.InterventionNot applicable.Main Outcome MeasurementsThe ABILHAND Questionnaire is Rasch analyzed, enabling ordinal data to be converted into an interval scale (logits) and the use of parametric statistical analyses. The participants responded to 23 items in the ABILHAND Questionnaire on 2 occasions, 2 weeks apart. Reliability was assessed with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC22.1), the mean difference between the test sessions (đ) together with the 95% confidence intervals for đ, the standard error of measurement (SEM and SEM%), the smallest real difference (SRD and SRD%), and a Bland and Altman graph.ResultsFour outliers with high mean logit scores (>4.0) were identified in the sample. The results therefore are presented both for the entire sample (n = 43) and without the 4 outliers (n = 39). The test‐retest agreement was high: ICC2,1 = 0.85 (n = 43) and 0.91 (n = 39). The SEM%, which represents the smallest change that indicates a real improvement for a group of individuals, was 21% (n = 43) and 15% (n = 39). The SRD%, which represents the smallest change that indicates a real clinical improvement for a single individual, was 59% (n = 43) and 42% (n = 39), respectively.ConclusionThe ABILHAND Questionnaire is reliable in persons with chronic stroke and can be recommended to evaluate recovery, rehabilitation interventions, and changes over time in a group of individuals but is less suitable for a single individual.

show abstract

“…52 Psychometric properties: the ARA has good intrarater, interrater and test ± retest reliability in stroke patients (all Spearman correlations 40.98). 52,53 The concurrent validity of the ARA has been con®rmed by comparison with the Brunnstrom-Fugl-Meyer Assessment (r40.91), 54,55 with the Sollerman test (r=0.94), 52 and with the motor assessment scale (MAS) (ICC=0.98). 56 Normative…”

Section: Name: the Physical Capacities Evaluation Of Hand Skill (Pce)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of upper extremity motor function tests in tetraplegics

Tuijl¹,

Janssen-Potten²,

Seelen³

2002

Spinal Cord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To provide an overview of arm±hand function tests useful in tetraplegic subjects. Considerations for selection of an appropriate test are also provided. Data sources: A Medline literature search was conducted covering the period from 1967 to March 2001. Relevant references cited in the selected papers were also considered, regardless of the year of publication. Study selection: This review was restricted to strength tests, functional and ADL tests. Only general tests and tests designed speci®cally to test tetraplegic persons written in English, or in Dutch were included in the review. Results: Information is provided on four types of strength tests, 10 general and ®ve speci®c functional tests and eight ADL tests. Conclusion: Many tests are available to measure upper extremity motor function in tetraplegics. Selection of a test is at ®rst determined by the outcome value in which the investigator is interested. When the type of outcome value has been determined, the most suitable test has to be selected from the range of available tests. When two tests appear to be equally suitable, the availability of information on psychometric properties of the test when used in tetraplegic patients is a decisive factor. When information on the reliability, validity and sensitivity of a test is missing, it should be gathered before using the test. Sponsorship: The present study was written with ®nancial assistance provided by the Health Research and Development Council of the Netherlands.

show abstract

The long-term outcome of arm function after stroke: results of a follow-up study

Cited by 599 publications

References 14 publications

A Study of the Clinical Utility of the BPI-12 and 23 in Predicting Shoulder Pain in Stroke Patients

A Study of the Clinical Utility of the BPI-12 and 23 in Predicting Shoulder Pain in Stroke Patients

Test‐Retest Reliability of the ABILHAND Questionnaire in Persons With Chronic Stroke

Evaluation of upper extremity motor function tests in tetraplegics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About