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


METHODS
Forty-eight stroke inpatients.


METHODS
The physical medicine and rehabilitation department of a medical centre.


METHODS
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.


CONCLUSIONS
The results of this study support the value of the ARAT and UE-MAS for measuring recovery of upper extremity function in stroke patients.
Hsueh
I-Ping
IP
School of Occupational Therapy, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, ROC.
Hsieh
Ching-Lin
CL
D000368:Aged; D001132:Arm / Q000503:physiopathology; D005260:Female; D018737:Hand Strength / Q000502:physiology; D006801:Humans; D007297:Inpatients; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009043:Motor Activity / Q000502:physiology; D020127:Recovery of Function / Q000502:physiology*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D012720:Severity of Illness Index; D020521:Stroke / Q000503:physiopathology*; D000071939:Stroke Rehabilitation; D013997:Time Factors; D034941:Upper Extremity / Q000503:physiopathology*