Test-retest reliability and rater agreements of assessment of capacity for myoelectric control version 2.0

Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development

Volumn 51, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 635-644

  Lindner, Helen Y N ^a   Langius Eklöf, Ann ^b   Hermansson, Liselotte M N ^a  

^a ÖREBRO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^b KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

Author keywords

ACMC; Assessment; Capacity; Myoelectric control; Myoelectric prosthetic hand; Prosthesis; Prosthetic hand control; Rater agreement; Test retest; Upper limb

Indexed keywords

NEUROMUSCULAR REHABILITATION; PROSTHETICS;

ACMC; ASSESSMENT; CAPACITY; MYOELECTRIC CONTROL; PROSTHETIC HAND CONTROLS; PROSTHETIC HANDS; TEST-RETEST; UPPER LIMBS;

MYOELECTRICALLY CONTROLLED PROSTHETICS;

ADULT; ARM PROSTHESIS; ARTICLE; ASSESSMENT OF CAPACITY FOR MYOELECTRIC CONTROL; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT TOOL; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MYOELECTRIC CONTROL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TEST RETEST RELIABILITY; ADOLESCENT; AGED; AMPUTATION; CHILD; ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY; HAND; HAND DEFORMITIES, CONGENITAL; HAND STRENGTH; MIDDLE AGED; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; OBSERVER VARIATION; PROSTHESES AND ORTHOSES; PROSTHESIS; REPRODUCIBILITY; TASK PERFORMANCE; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AMPUTATION; CHILD; ELECTROPHYSIOLOGICAL PROCESSES; FEMALE; HAND; HAND DEFORMITIES, CONGENITAL; HAND STRENGTH; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOTOR SKILLS; OBSERVER VARIATION; PROSTHESES AND IMPLANTS; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84905671717     PISSN: 07487711     EISSN: 19381352     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1682/JRRD.2013.09.0197     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Smurr LM, Gulick K, Yancosek K, Ganz O. Managing the upper extremity amputee: A protocol for success. J Hand Ther. 2008;21(2):160-75, quiz 176. [PMID:18436138]http://dx.doi.org/10.1197/j.jht.2007.09.006
2. Alexander M, Matthews D. Pediatric rehabilitation: Principles and practices. 4th ed. New York (NY): Demos Medical; 2009. p. 210-29.
3. Bouwsema H, Kyberd PJ, Hill W, van der Sluis CK, Bongers RM. Determining skill level in myoelectric prosthesis use with multiple outcome measures. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2012;49(9):1331-48. [PMID:23408215]http://dx.doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2011.09.0179
4. Hubbard S, Stocker D, Heger H. "Training" powered upper-limb prostheses. In: Muzumdar A, editor. Powered upper-limb prostheses: Control, implementation and clinical implication. Berlin (Germany): Springer-Verlag; 2004. p. 147-74.
5. Hill W, Kyberd P, Norling Hermansson L, Hubbard S, Stavdahl Ø, Swanson S. Upper Limb Prosthetic Outcome Measures (ULPOM): A working group and their findings. J Prosthet Orthot. 2009;21(9):P69-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JPO.0b013e3181ae970b
6. Lindner HY, Nätterlund BS, Hermansson LM. Upper limb prosthetic outcome measures: Review and content comparison based on International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2010;34(2):109-28. [PMID:20470058]http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/03093641003776976
7. Wright FV. Prosthetic outcome measures for use with upper limb amputees: A systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature, 1970-2009. J Prosthet Orthot. 2009;21(9):P3-63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JPO.0b013e3181ae9637
8. McFarland LV, Hubbard Winkler SL, Heinemann AW, Jones M, Esquenazi A. Unilateral upper-limb loss: Satisfaction and prosthetic-device use in veterans and servicemembers from Vietnam and OIF/OEF conflicts. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2010;47(4):299-316. [PMID:20803400]http://dx.doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2009.03.0027
9. Hermansson LM, Bodin L, Eliasson AC. Intra- and inter-rater reliability of the assessment of capacity for myoelectric control. J Rehabil Med. 2006;38(2):118-23. [PMID:16546769]http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/16501970500312222
10. Hermansson LM, Fisher AG, Bernspång B, Eliasson AC. Assessment of capacity for myoelectric control: A new Rasch-built measure of prosthetic hand control. J Rehabil Med. 2005;37(3):166-71. [PMID:16040474]
11. Lindner HY, Linacre JM, Norling Hermansson LM. Assessment of capacity for myoelectric control: Evaluation of construct and rating scale. J Rehabil Med. 2009;41(6):467-74. [PMID:19479160]http://dx.doi.org/10.2340/16501977-0361
12. Simon AM, Lock BA, Stubblefield KA. Patient training for functional use of pattern recognition-controlled prostheses. J Prosthet Orthot. 2012;24(2):56-64. [PMID:22563231]http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JPO.0b013e3182515437
13. Hermansson LM, Hill W, Lindner HY. Assessment of Capacity for Myoelectric Control version 2.0: Training manual. Örebro (Sweden): Örebro University Hospital; 2011.
14. Miller LA, McIntire SA, Lovler RL. Foundations of psychological testing: A practical approach. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks (CA): SAGE Publications; 2013. p. 156-89.
15. Yu CH. Test-retest reliability. In: Kempf-Leonard IK, editor. Encyclopedia of social measurement. San Diego (CA): Academic Press; 2005. p. 777-84.
16. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Katz JN, Wright JG, Wells G, Boers M, Strand V, Shea B. Looking for important change/differences in studies of responsiveness. OMERACT MCID Working Group. Outcome Measures in Rheumatology. Minimal Clinically Important Difference. J Rheumatol. 2001;28(2):400-405. [PMID:11246687]
17. de Vet HC, Terwee CB, Ostelo RW, Beckerman H, Knol DL, Bouter LM. Minimal changes in health status questionnaires: Distinction between minimally detectable change and minimally important change. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006;4:54. [PMID:16925807]http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-4-54
18. King MT. A point of minimal important difference (MID): A critique of terminology and methods. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2011;11(2):171-84. [PMID:21476819]http://dx.doi.org/10.1586/erp.11.9
19. de Vet HC, Terwee CB. The minimal detectable change should not replace the minimal important difference. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(7):804-6. [PMID:20399609]http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.12.015
20. Bonett DG. Sample size requirements for estimating intraclass correlations with desired precision. Stat Med. 2002; 21(9):1331-35. [PMID:12111881]http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sim.1108
21. Lindner HY, Eliasson AC, Hermansson LM. Influence of standardized activities on validity of Assessment of Capacity for Myoelectric Control. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013;50(10):1391-1400. [PMID:24699974]http://dx.doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2012.12.0231
22. Altman DG, Bland JM. Treatment allocation by minimisation. BMJ. 2005;330(7495):843. [PMID:15817555]http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.330.7495.843
23. Fleiss JL, Levin B, Cho P. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. 3rd ed. New York (NY): Wiley; 2003. p. 598-626.
24. Eckes T. Introduction to many-facet Rasch measurement: Analyzing and evaluating rater-mediated assessments. New York (NY): Peter Lang Publishing Group; 2011.
25. Wright BD, Stone MH. Best test design. Chicago (IL): MESA; 1979. p. 69.
26. Linacre JM, Wright BD. Construction of measures from many-facet data. J Appl Meas. 2002;3(4):486-512. [PMID:12486312]
27. Bond TG, Fox CM. Applying the Rasch model: fundamental measurement in the human sciences. 2nd ed. Mahwah (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2007. p. 29-48.
28. McGraw KO, Wong SP. Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychol Methods. 1996;1(1):30-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.1.1.30
29. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull. 1979;86(2):420-28.
30. Kottner J, Audigé L, Brorson S, Donner A, Gajewski BJ, Hróbjartsson A, Roberts C, Shoukri M, Streiner DL. Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies (GRRAS) were proposed. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64(1):96-106. [PMID:21130355]http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.03.002
31. Bland JM, Altman DG. A note on the use of the intraclass correlation coefficient in the evaluation of agreement between two methods of measurement. Comput Biol Med. 1990;20(5):337-40. [PMID:2257734]http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0010-4825(90)90013-F
32. Bland JM, Altman DG. Applying the right statistics: Analyses of measurement studies. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2003;22(1):85-93. [PMID:12858311]http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/uog.122
33. Bland JM, Altman DG. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res. 1999;8(2): 135-60. [PMID:10501650]http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/096228099673819272
34. Weir JP. Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. J Strength Cond Res. 2005;19(1):231-40. [PMID:15705040]
35. Buffart LM, Roebroeck ME, Janssen WG, Hoekstra A, Hovius SE, Stam HJ. Comparison of instruments to assess hand function in children with radius deficiencies. J Hand Surg Am. 2007;32(4):531-40. [PMID:17398365]http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2007.01.011
36. Lu WS, Wang CH, Lin JH, Sheu CF, Hsieh CL. The minimal detectable change of the simplified stroke rehabilitation assessment of movement measure. J Rehabil Med. 2008;40(8):615-19. [PMID:19020694]http://dx.doi.org/10.2340/16501977-0230
37. Romero S, Bishop MD, Velozo CA, Light K. Minimum detectable change of the Berg Balance Scale and Dynamic Gait Index in older persons at risk for falling. J Geriatr Phys Ther. 2011;34(3):131-37. [PMID:21937903]http://dx.doi.org/10.1519/JPT.0b013e3182048006
38. IBM. Weighted kappa, Kappa for ordered categories [Internet]. Armonk (NY): IBM Corporation; 2011 [cited 2012 Oct 30]. Available from: https://www-304.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21477357
39. Bagley AM, Molitor F, Wagner LV, Tomhave W, James MA. The Unilateral Below Elbow Test: A function test for children with unilateral congenital below elbow deficiency. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2006;48(7):569-75. [PMID:16780626]http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0012162206001204
40. Resnik L, Adams L, Borgia M, Delikat J, Disla R, Ebner C, Walters LS. Development and evaluation of the Activities Measure for Upper-Limb Amputees. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;94(3):488-94.
41. Buffart LM, Roebroeck ME, van Heijningen VG, Pesch-Batenburg JM, Stam HJ. Evaluation of arm and prosthetic functioning in children with a congenital transverse reduction deficiency of the upper limb. J Rehabil Med. 2007; 39(5):379-86. [PMID:17549329]http://dx.doi.org/10.2340/16501977-0068
42. Bongers RM, Kyberd PJ, Bouwsema HM, Kenney LP, Plettenburg DH, Van der Sluis CK. Bernstein's levels of construction of movements applied to upper limb prosthetics. J Prosthet Orthot. 2012;24(2):67-76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/JPO.0b013e3182532419
43. Black N, Biden EN, Rickards J. Using potential energy to measure work related activities for persons wearing upper limb prostheses. Robotica. 1999;23(3):319-27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0263574704001341
44. Light CM, Chappell PH, Kyberd PJ. Establishing a standardized clinical assessment tool of pathologic and prosthetic hand function: Normative data, reliability, and validity. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83(6):776-83. [PMID:12048655]http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/apmr.2002.32737
45. van Lunteren A, van Lunteren-Gerritsen GH, Stassen HG, Zuithoff MJ. A field evaluation of arm prostheses for unilateral amputees. Prosthet Orthot Int. 1983;7(3):141-51. [PMID:6647010]
46. Bhaskaranand K, Bhat AK, Acharya KN. Prosthetic rehabilitation in traumatic upper limb amputees (an Indian perspective). Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2003;123(7):363-66. [PMID:12827395]http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00402-003-0546-4
47. Hebert JS, Lewicke J. Case report of modified Box and Blocks test with motion capture to measure prosthetic function. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2012;49(8):1163-74. [PMID:23341309]http://dx.doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2011.10.0207
48. Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials. 1989;10(4):407-15. [PMID:2691207]http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0197-2456(89)90005-6
49. Beaton DE, Boers M, Wells GA. Many faces of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID): A literature review and directions for future research. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2002;14(2):109-14. [PMID:11845014]http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00002281-200203000-00006
50. Lang CE, Edwards DF, Birkenmeier RL, Dromerick AW. Estimating minimal clinically important differences of upper-extremity measures early after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89(9):1693-1700. [PMID:18760153]http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2008.02.022
51. Brenner H, Kliebsch U. Dependence of weighted kappa coefficients on the number of categories. Epidemiology. 1996;7(2):199-202. [PMID:8834562]http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00001648-199603000-00016
52. Fleiss JL, Cohen J. The equivalence of weighted kappa and the intraclass correlation coefficient as measures of reliability. Educ Psychol Meas. 1973;33(3):613-19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/001316447303300309