Psychometric properties of the lower extremity subscale of the Fugl-Myer assessment for community-dwelling hemiplegic stroke patients

Journal of Physical Therapy Science

Volumn 26, Issue 11, 2014, Pages 1775-1777

  Park, Eun Young ^a   Choi, Yoo Im ^b  

^a Jeonju University   (South Korea)

^b Wonkwang University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Fugl meyer assessment; Hemiplegic stroke; Lower extremity

Indexed keywords

EID: 84925213271     PISSN: 09155287     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1589/jpts.26.1775     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Sullivan KJ, Tilson JK, Cen SY, et al.: Fugl-Meyer assessment of sensorimotor function after stroke: standardized training procedure for clinical practice and clinical trials. Stroke, 2011, 42: 427-432. [Medline] [Cross- Ref].
2. Chae J, Johnston M, Kim H, et al.: Admission motor impairment as a predictor of physical disability after stroke rehabilitation. Am J Phys Med Rehabil, 1995, 74: 218-223. [Medline] [CrossRef].
3. Jørgensen HS, Nakayama H, Raaschou HO, et al.: Recovery of walking function in stroke patients: the Copenhagen Stroke Study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 1995, 76: 27-32. [Medline] [CrossRef].
4. Langhorne P, Coupar F, Pollock A: Motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review. Lancet Neurol, 2009, 8: 741-754. [Medline] [CrossRef].
5. Page SJ, Levine P, Hade E: Psychometric properties and administration of the wrist/hand subscales of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment in minimally impaired upper extremity hemiparesis in stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 2012, 93: 2373-2376, e5. [Medline] [CrossRef].
6. Woodbury ML, Velozo CA, Richards LG, et al.: Dimensionality and construct validity of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment of the upper extremity. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 2007, 88: 715-723. [Medline] [CrossRef].
7. Perry J, Garrett M, Gronley JK, et al.: Classification of walking handicap in the stroke population. Stroke, 1995, 26: 982-989. [Medline] [CrossRef].
8. Malouin F, Pichard L, Bonneau C, et al.: Evaluating motor recovery early after stroke: comparison of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment and the Motor Assessment Scale. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 1994, 75: 1206-1212. [Medline] [CrossRef].
9. van der Lee JH, Beckerman H, Lankhorst GJ, et al.: The responsiveness of the Action Research Arm test and the Fugl-Meyer Assessment scale in chronic stroke patients. J Rehabil Med, 2001, 33: 110-113. [Medline] [CrossRef].
10. Rabadi MH, Rabadi FM: Comparison of the action research arm test and the Fugl-Meyer assessment as measures of upper-extremity motor weakness after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 2006, 87: 962-966. [Medline] [CrossRef].
11. Kim H, Her J, Ko J, et al.: Reliability, concurrent validity, and responsiveness of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) for hemiplegic patients. J Phys Ther Sci, 2012, 24: 893-899. [CrossRef].
12. Crow JL, Harmeling-van der Wel BC: Hierarchical properties of the motor function sections of the Fugl-Meyer assessment scale for people after stroke: a retrospective study. Phys Ther, 2008, 88: 1554-1567. [Medline] [CrossRef].
13. Gladstone DJ, Danells CJ, Black SE: The fugl-meyer assessment of motor recovery after stroke: a critical review of its measurement properties. Neurorehabil Neural Repair, 2002, 16: 232-240. [Medline] [CrossRef].
14. Crow JL, Kwakkel G, Bussmann JB, et al.: Are hierarchical properties of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment Scale (FM Motor Scale) the same in acute and chronic stroke? Phys Ther, 2014, Advance online publication. [CrossRef].
15. Hambleton RK, Swaminatha H, Rogers HJ: Fundamentals of Item Response Theory. Newbury Park: Sage, 1991, pp 50-160.
16. Waller NG, Kojetin BA, Bouchard TJ, et al.: Genetic and environmental influences on religious interests, attitudes, and values: a study of twins reared apart and together. Psychol Sci, 1990, 1: 138-142. [CrossRef].
17. Chen KL, Chen CT, Chou YT, et al.: Is the long form of the Fugl-Meyer Motor Scale more responsive than the short form in patients with wtroke? Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 2014, Advance online publication. [CrossRef].
18. Kane RL: Understanding Health Care Outcomes Research, 2nd ed. Massachusetts: Jones and Bartlett, 2006, pp 60-193.
19. Ebel RL: Measuring Educational Acheivement. NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1972, p 399.
20. Sung TJ: The Theory and Practice of Item Development and Analysis. Seoul: Hakjisa, 2004, pp 193-218.
21. Nunnally JS, Bernstein IH: Psychometric Theory, 3rd ed. USA: McGraw- Hill, 1994, pp 264-265.
22. Duncan PW, Propst M, Nelson SG: Reliability of the Fugl-Meyer assessment of sensorimotor recovery following cerebrovascular accident. Phys Ther, 1983, 63: 1606-1610. [Medline].