Psychometric properties of the Rivermead Motor Assessment: Its utility in stroke

Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine

Volumn 41, Issue 13, 2009, Pages 1055-1061

  Kurtaiş, Yesim ^a   Küçükdeveci, Ayşe ^a   Elhan, Atilla ^a   Yilmaz, Ahmet ^a   Kalli, Tuǧba ^a   Tur, Birkan Sonel ^a   Tennant, Alan ^b  

^a ANKARA UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Motor assessment; Outcome assessment; Rehabilitation; Reproducibility of results; Stroke

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CONSTRUCT VALIDITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; CRONBACH ALPHA COEFFICIENT; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; PSYCHOMETRY; RASCH ANALYSIS; RATING SCALE; RIVERMEAD MOTOR ASSESSMENT; STROKE; DISABILITY; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; MOTOR ACTIVITY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REPRODUCIBILITY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; DISABILITY EVALUATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOTOR ACTIVITY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PSYCHOMETRICS; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; STROKE;

EID: 70449726878     PISSN: 16501977     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2340/16501977-0463     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Harvey RL. Improving poststroke recovery: neuroplasticity and task-oriented training. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med 2009; 11: 251-259.
2. Machado S, Bittencourt J, Minc D, Portella CE, Velasques B, Cunha M, et al. Therapeutic applications of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in clinical neurorehabilitation. Funct Neurol 2008; 23: 113-122.
3. Lincoln N, Leadbitter D. Assessment of motor function in stroke patients. Physiotherapy 1979; 65: 48-51. (Pubitemid 10219884)
4. De Wit L, Putman K, Schuback B, Komárek A, Angst F, Baert I, et al. Motor and functional recovery after stroke: a comparison of 4 European rehabilitation centers. Stroke 2007; 38: 2101-2107.
5. Mayr A, Kofler M, Quirbach E, Matzak H, Fröhlich K, Saltuari L. Prospective, blinded, randomized crossover study of gait rehabilitation in stroke patients using the Lokomat gait orthosis. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2007; 21: 307-314. (Pubitemid 46871850)
6. Woldag H, Gerhold LL, de Groot M, Wohlfart K, Wagner A, Hummelsheim H. Early prediction of functional outcome after stroke. Brain Inj 2006; 20: 1047-1052.
7. Johnson CA, Burridge JH, Strike PW, Wood DE, Swain ID. The effect of combined use of botulinum toxin type A and functional electric stimulation in the treatment of spastic drop foot after stroke: a preliminary investigation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004; 85: 902-909.
8. van Vliet PM, Lincoln NB, Foxall A. Comparison of Bobath based and movement science based treatment for stroke: a randomised controlled trial. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2005; 76: 503-508. (Pubitemid 40486573)
9. Werner C, Von Frankenberg S, Treig T, Konrad M, Hesse S. Treadmill training with partial body weight support and an electromechanical gait trainer for restoration of gait in subacute stroke patients: a randomized crossover study. Stroke 2002; 33: 2895-2901. (Pubitemid 35462863)
10. Lincoln NB, Parry RH, Vass CD. Randomized, controlled trial to evaluate increased intensity of physiotherapy treatment of arm function after stroke. Stroke 1999; 30: 573-579.
11. Collen FM, Wade DT, Bradshaw CM. Mobility after stroke: reliability of measures of impairment and disability. Int Disabil Studies 1990; 12: 6-9. (Pubitemid 20300158)
12. Collin C, Wade D. Assessing motor impairment after stroke: a pilot reliability study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1990; 53: 576-579. (Pubitemid 20240010)
13. Adams SA, Ashburn A, Pickering RM, Taylor D. The scalability of the Rivermead Motor Assessment in acute stroke patients. Clin Rehabil 1997; 11: 42-51. (Pubitemid 27105753)
14. Adams SA, Pickering RM, Ashburn A, Lincoln NB. The scalability of the Rivermead Motor Assessment in nonacute stroke patients. Clin Rehabil 1997; 11: 52-59. (Pubitemid 27105754)
15. Tesio L, Simone A, Bernardinello M. Rehabilitation and outcome measurement: where is Rasch analysis-going? Eura Medicophys 2007; 43: 417-426.
16. Van de Winckel A, Feys H, Lincoln N, de Weerdt W. Assessment of arm function in stroke patients: Rivermead Motor Assessment arm section revised with Rasch analysis. Clin Rehab 2007; 21: 471-479. (Pubitemid 47064942)
17. Mokken RJ. The theory and procedure of scale analysis with applications in political research. New York: Walter de Gruyter, Mouton; 1971.
18. The World Health Organization MONICA Project (monitoring trends and determinants in cardiovascular disease): a major international collaboration. WHO MONICA Project Principal Investigators. J Clin Epidemiol 1988; 41: 105-114.
19. Hamilton BB, Granger CV, Sherwin FS, Zielezny M, Tashman JS. Uniform national data system for medical rehabilitation. In: Fuhrer MJ, editor. Rehabilitation outcomes: analysis and measurement. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.; 1987, p. 137-147.
20. Küçükdeveci AA, Yavuzer G, Elhan AH, Sonel B, Tennant A. Adaptation of the Functional Independence Measure for use in Turkey. Clin Rehabil 2001; 15: 311-319. (Pubitemid 32471890)
21. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 2000; 25: 3186-3191. (Pubitemid 32042951)
22. Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 1951; 16: 297-334.
23. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intra class correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bull 1979; 86: 420-428.
24. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1995.
25. Mokken RJ, Lewis C. A nonparametric approach to the analysis of dichotomous item responses. Appl Psychol Meas 1982; 6: 417-430.
26. Molenaar IW. A weighted Loevinger H-coefficient extending Mokken scaling to multicategory items. Kwantitatieve Methoden 1988; 9: 115-126.
27. van Shuur WH. Mokken scale analysis: between the Guttman scale and parametric item response theory. Polit Anal 2003; 11: 139-163. (Pubitemid 36571834)
28. Christensen KB, Kreiner S. Monte Carlo tests of the Rasch model based on scalability coefficients. Br J Math Stat Psychol 2009 Apr 1 [Epub ahead of print].
29. Rasch G. Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1960 (reprinted 1980).
30. Andrich D. Rasch models for measurement. London: Sage Publications; 1988.
31. Fischer GH, Derivations of the Rasch model. In: Fischer GH, Molenaar IW, editors. Rasch models; foundations, recent developments and applications. Springer-Verlag: New York; 1995.
32. Pallant JF. Tennant A. An introduction to the Rasch measurement model: an example using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Brit J Clin Psychology 2007; 46: 1-18. (Pubitemid 46332274)
33. Tennant A, Conaghan PG. The Rasch measurement model in rheumatology: What is it and why use it? When should it be applied, and what should one look for in a Rasch paper? Arthritis Care Res 2007; 57: 1358-1362.
34. Angoff WH. Perspectives on differential item functioning methodology. In: Holland PW, Wainer H, editors. Differential item functioning. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Eribaum; 1993, p. 3-23.
35. Smith EV. Detecting and evaluation the impact of multidimensionality using item fit statistics and principal component analysis of residuals. J Appl Measure 2002; 3: 205-231.
36. Wright JG, Young NL. A comparison of different indices of responsiveness. J Clin Epidemiol 1997; 50: 239-246.
37. Linacre JM. Sample size and item calibration stability. Rasch Measure Trans 1994; 7: 28.
38. Bland JM, Altman DG. Multiple significance tests: the Bonferroni method. BMJ 1995; 310: 170.
39. StataCorp. Stata Statistical Software: Release 10. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP; 2007.
40. Andrich D, Lyne A, Sheridon B, Luo G. RUMM 2020. Perth: RUMM Laboratory; 2003.