Development and Validation of a Scale for Rating Motor Compensations Used for Reaching in Patients with Hemiparesis: The Reaching Performance Scale

Physical Therapy

Volumn 84, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 8-22

  Lèvin, Mindy F ^a   Desrosiers, Johanne ^b   Beauchemin, Danielle ^c   Bergeron, Nathalie ^c   Rochette, Annie ^b  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF GERIATRICS OF SHERBROOKE   (Canada)

^c Rehabilitation Institute of Montreal   (Canada)

Author keywords

Compensatory strategies; Hemiparesis; Reaching performance; Validation

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ANALYTIC METHOD; ARM MOVEMENT; ARTICLE; BODY MOVEMENT; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; FEMALE; FUNCTION TEST; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HAND MOVEMENT; HEMIPARESIS; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; OBSERVER VARIATION; RATING SCALE; REACHING PERFORMANCE SCALE; RELIABILITY; SCALE UP; SCORING SYSTEM; STROKE; VALIDATION PROCESS; VIDEORECORDING;

EID: 0347358953     PISSN: 00319023     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ptj/84.1.8     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Levin MF. Interjoint coordination during pointing movements is disrupted in spastic hemiparesis. Brain. 1996;119:281-294.
2. Cirstea CM, Levin MF. Compensatory strategies for reaching in stroke. Brain. 2000;123:940-953.
3. Michaelsen SM, Luta A, Roby-Brami A, Levin MF. Effect of trunk restraint on the recovery of reaching movements in hemiparetic patients. Stroke. 2002;32:1875-1883.
4. Levin MF, Michaelsen SM, Cirstea CM, Roby-Brami A. Use of the trunk for reaching targets placed within and beyond the reach in adult hemiparesis. Exp Brain Res. 2002;143:171-180.
5. Carr J, Shepherd R. Motor Relearning Program for Stroke. Rockville, Md: Aspen Systems; 1985.
6. Horak FB. Assumptions underlying motor control for neurologic rehabilitation. In: Contemporary Management of Motor Control Problems: Proceedings of the II STEP Conference. Alexandria, Va: Foundation for Physical Therapy; 1991:11-27.
7. Bernstein NA, Buravtseva GR. Coordination disorders and the recovery of walking biodynamics after cerebrovascular brain injuries. Motor Control. 1998;2:183-186. Original in Russian: Proceedings of the VII Meeting of the Scientific Institute of Neurology of the Academy of Medical Sciences of the USSR, Moscow. 1954:28-30.
8. Bernstein NA, Buravtseva GR. Coordination disorders and the recovery of walking biodynamics after cerebrovascular brain injuries. Motor Control. 1998;2:183-186. Original in Russian: Proceedings of the VII Meeting of the Scientific Institute of Neurology of the Academy of Medical Sciences of the USSR, Moscow. 1954:28-30.
9. Levin MF. Should stereotypic movement synergies in hemiparetic patients be considered adaptive? Behav Brain Sci. 1996;19:79-80.
10. Cirstea CM, Ptito A, Forget R, Levin MF. Arm motor improvement in stroke patients may depend on type of training. Soc Neurosci Abstr. 2000;26:162.
11. Ada L, Canning CG, Carr JH, Kilbreath SL. Task-specific training of reaching and manipulation. In: Bennett KMB, Castiello U, eds. Insights Into the Reach to Grasp Movement. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Elsevier; 1994:239-264.
12. Nudo RJ, Wise BM, SiFuentes F, Milliken GW. Neural substrates for the effects of rehabilitative training on motor recovery after ischemic infarct. Science. 1996;272:1791-1794.
13. Dean DM, Shepherd RB. Task-related training improves performance of seated reaching tasks after stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Stroke. 1997;28:722-728.
14. Taub E, Wolf SL. Constraint induced movement techniques to facilitate upper extremity use in stroke patients. Top Stroke Rehabil. 1997;3(4):38-61.
15. Taub E, Crago JE, Burgio LD, et al. An operant approach to rehabilitation medicine: overcoming learned nonuse by shaping. J Exp Anal Behav. 1994;61:281-293.
16. Shumway-Cook A, Woollacott MH. Motor Control: Theory and Practical Applications. Baltimore, Md: Williams & Wilkins; 1985.
17. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICFDH). World Health Organization Web site. Available at: http://www.who.int/classification/icf/intros/ICF-Eng-Intro.pdf). Accessed September 2002.
18. Gentile A. Skill acquisition: action, movement, and neuromotor processes: In: Carr J, Shepherd R, eds. Movement Science: Foundations for Physical Therapy in Rehabilitation. Rockville, Md: Aspen; 1987:93-117.
19. Wade DT. Measurement in Neurological Rehabilitation. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press; 1992:3-174.
20. Mahoney RI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: the Barthel Index. Maryland State Medical Journal. 1965;14:61-65.
21. Gowland C, Stratford P, Ward M, et al. Measuring physical impairment and disability with the Chedoke-McMaster Stroke Assessment. Stroke. 1993;24:58-63.
22. Fugl-Meyer AR, Jääskö L, Leyman I, et al. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient: a method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1975;7:13-31.
23. Brunnström S. Motor testing procedures in hemiplegia: based on sequential recovery stages. Phys Ther. 1966;46:357-375.
24. Latash ML, Anson JG. What are "normal movements" in atypical populations? Behav Brain Sci. 1996;19:55-106.
25. Roby-Brami A, Fuchs S, Mokhtari M, Bussel B. Reaching and grasping strategies in hemiparetic patients. Motor Control. 1997;1:72-91.
26. Sollerman C. Assessment of grip function: evaluation of a new method. MITAB. 1984.
27. Tiffen J. Purdue Pegboard Examiner Manual. Chicago, Ill: Science Research Associates; 1968.
28. Minnesota Rate of Manipulation Tests: Examiner's Manual. Circle Pines, Minn: Western Psychological Services; 1969.
29. Roby-Brami A, Jacobs S, Bennis N, Levin MF. Hand orientation for grasping and arm joint rotation patterns in healthy subjects and hemiparetic stroke patients. Brain Res. 2003;969:217-229.
30. Levin MF, Hui-Chan CWY. Relief of hemiparetic spasticity by TENS is associated with improvements in reflex and voluntary functions. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1992;82:131-142.
31. Mathiowetz V, Weber K, Volland G, Kashman N. Reliability and validity of grip and pinch strength evaluations. J Hand Surgery [Am]. 1984;9:222-226.
32. Desrosiers J, Hébert R, Dutil É, Bravo G. Development and reliability of an upper extremity function test for the elderly: the TEMPA. Can J Occup Ther. 1993;60:9-16.
33. Desrosiers J, Hébert R, Dutil É, et al. Validity of a measurement instrument for upper extremity performance: the TEMPA. Occup Ther J Res. 1994;1:267-281.
34. Clinical Assessment Recommendations. 2nd ed. Chicago, Ill: American Society of Hand Therapists; 1992.
35. Bravo G, Potvin L. Estimating the reliability of continuous measures with Cronbach's alpha or the intraclass correlation coefficient: toward the integration of two traditions. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991;44:381-390.
36. Fleiss JL. The Design and Analysis of Clinical Experiments. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 1995.
37. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlation: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull. 1979;86:420-428.
38. Cohen JA. Coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1960;20:37-46.
39. Fleiss JL. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. 2nd ed. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 1981.
40. Cohen JA. Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychol Bull 1968;70:213-220.
41. Landis JR, Kock GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159-174.
42. Nagi S. Some conceptual issues in disability and rehabilitation. In: Sussman, M, ed. Sociology and Rehabilitation. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University Press; 1965:100.
43. Nagi S. Disability concepts revisited. In: Pope AM, Tarlov AR, eds. Disability in America: Toward a National Agenda for Prevention. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1991:309.
44. Dannenbaum R, Michaelsen SM, Desrosiers J, Levin MF. Development and validation of two new sensory tests of the hand for patients with stroke. Clin Rehabil. 2002;16:630-639.
45. Levin MF, Dimov M. Spatial coordinates for muscle coactivation and the control of postural stability. Brain Res. 1997;757:43-59.
46. Levin MF, Selles RW, Verheul MHG, Meijer OG. Deficits in the coordination of agonist and antagonist muscles in stroke patients: implications for normal motor control. Brain Res. 2000;853:352-369.
47. Loewen SC, Anderson BA. Reliability of the Modified Motor Assessment Scale and the Barthel Index. Phys Ther. 1988;68:1077-1081.
48. Poole JL, Whitney SL. Motor assessment scale for stroke patients: concurrent validity and interrater reliability. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1988;69:195-197.
49. Sneeuw KC, Aaronson NK, Sprangers MAG, et al. Comparison of patient and proxi EORTC QOL-C30 ratings in assessing the quality of life of cancer patients. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51:617-631.
50. Feinstein AR, Cicchetti DV. High agreement but low kappa, I: the problems of two paradoxes. J Clin Epidemiol. 1990;43:543-549.
51. Turner P, Whitfield TW. Physiotherapists' use of evidence based practice: a cross-national study. Physiother Res Int. 1997;2:17-29.
52. Vanderkooy J, Bach B, Gross A. A clinical effort toward maximizing evidence-based practice. Physiotherapy Canada. Fall 1999:273-279.