Responsiveness of two upper extremity function instruments for stroke inpatients receiving rehabilitation

Clin Rehabil. 2002 Sep;16(6):617-24. doi: 10.1191/0269215502cr530oa.

Abstract

Objective: To compare the responsiveness of the Action Research Arm test (ARAT) and the upper extremity section of the Motor Assessment Scale (UE-MAS) in assessing the recovery of upper extremity function in stroke inpatients receiving rehabilitation.

Subjects: Forty-eight stroke inpatients.

Setting: The physical medicine and rehabilitation department of a medical centre.

Design: The patients were tested at admission and at discharge from the department.

Methods: Various indices, including effect size d, Wilcoxon test and Spearman's rho, were used to assess responsiveness. The change in score of the upper extremity subscale of the Fugl-Meyer scale was used as the external criterion.

Results: The responsiveness indices of both total scores of the ARAT and UE-MAS are generally moderate and similar (d = 0.52, Wilcoxon Z = 5.03, p < 0.001 and rho = 0.66 for the ARAT; d = 0.45, Z = 4.54, p < 0.001 and rho = 0.7 for the UE-MAS). Responsiveness indices are small to moderate and similar in each of the subscales of both instruments.

Conclusion: The results of this study support the value of the ARAT and UE-MAS for measuring recovery of upper extremity function in stroke patients.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
  • Validation Study

MeSH terms

  • Aged
  • Arm / physiopathology
  • Female
  • Hand Strength / physiology
  • Humans
  • Inpatients*
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Motor Activity / physiology
  • Recovery of Function / physiology*
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Sensitivity and Specificity
  • Severity of Illness Index
  • Stroke / physiopathology*
  • Stroke Rehabilitation*
  • Time Factors
  • Upper Extremity / physiopathology*