Psychometric properties of measures of upper limb activity performance in adults with and without spasticity undergoing neurorehabilitation–A systematic review
journal contributionposted on 31.03.2021, 06:36 by Shannon PikeShannon Pike, A Cusick, K Wales, L Cameron, L Turner-Stokes, S Ashford, Natasha LanninNatasha Lannin
© 2021 Pike et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Introduction This systematic review appraises the measurement quality of tools which assess activity and/or participation in adults with upper limb spasticity arising from neurological impairment, including methodological quality of the psychometric studies. Differences in the measurement quality of the tools for adults with a neurological impairment, but without upper limb spasticity, is also presented. Methods 29 measurement tools identified in a published review were appraised in this systematic review. For each identified tool, we searched 3 databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL) to identify psychometric studies completed with neurorehabilitation samples. Methodological quality of instrument evaluations was assessed with use of the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Status Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist. Synthesis of ratings allowed an overall rating of the psychometric evidence for each measurement tool to be calculated. Results 149 articles describing the development or evaluation of psychometric properties of 22 activity and/or participation measurement tools were included. Evidence specific to tool use for adults with spasticity was identified within only 15 of the 149 articles and provided evidence for 9 measurement tools only. Overall, COSMIN appraisal highlighted a lack of evidence of measurement quality. Synthesis of ratings demonstrated all measures had psychometric weaknesses or gaps in evidence (particularly for use of tools with adults with spasticity). Conclusions The systematic search, appraisal and synthesis revealed that currently there is insufficient measurement quality evidence to recommend one tool over another. Notwithstanding this conclusion, newer tools specifically designed for use with people with neurological conditions who have upper limb spasticity, have emergent measurement properties that warrant further research.
This work was supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship (SP); NAL was supported by a Future Leader Fellowship (102055) from the National Heart Foundation of Australia. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the mauscript.
Article NumberARTN e0246288
PublisherPUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
Rights StatementThe Author reserves all moral rights over the deposited text and must be credited if any re-use occurs. Documents deposited in OPAL are the Open Access versions of outputs published elsewhere. Changes resulting from the publishing process may therefore not be reflected in this document. The final published version may be obtained via the publisher’s DOI. Please note that additional copyright and access restrictions may apply to the published version.
Science & TechnologyMultidisciplinary SciencesScience & Technology - Other TopicsQUALITY-OF-LIFEFUNCTIONAL INDEPENDENCE MEASUREMOTOR-ASSESSMENT SCALEACTIVITY MEASURE ARMAUPPER-EXTREMITY FUNCTIONHEALTH SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRETRAUMATIC BRAIN-INJURYFUGL-MEYER ASSESSMENTTOXIN TYPE-AMULTIPLE-SCLEROSISGeneral Science & Technology