All 5 tests demonstrated satisfactory test-retest reproducibility for a diverse group of patients with stroke. However, all tests showed higher levels of measurement error when performed with the more affected hand and in patients with hypertonicity of that hand. Thus, baseline and postrehabilitation change scores using these common tests of strength and dexterity must be interpreted with some caution, especially in poorly controlled clinical trials. Repeated measures ought to be incorporated to examine reliability within a trial that includes participants with a hypertonic hand.

Background and Purpose-This study compared the psychometric properties of 3 clinical balance measures, the Berg Balance Scale (BBS), the Balance subscale of the Fugl-Meyer test (FM-B), and the Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke Patients (PASS), in stroke patients with a broad range of neurological and functional impairment from the acute stage up to 180 days after onset. Methods-One hundred twenty-three stroke patients were followed up prospectively with the 3 balance measures 14, 30, 90, and 180 days after stroke onset (DAS). Reliability (interrater reliability and internal consistency) and validity (concurrent validity, convergent validity, and predictive validity) of each measure were examined. A comparison of the responsiveness of each of the 3 measures was made on the basis of the entire group of patients and 3 separate groups classified by degree of neurological severity. Results-The FM-B and BBS showed a significant floor or ceiling effect at some DAS points, whereas the PASS did not show these effects. The BBS, FM-B, and PASS all had good reliability and validity for patients at different recovery stages after stroke. The results of effect size demonstrated fair to good responsiveness of all 3 measures within the first 90 DAS but, as expected, only a low level of responsiveness at 90 to 180 DAS. The PASS was more responsive to changes in severe stroke patients at the earliest period after stroke onset, 14 to 30 DAS. Conclusions-All 3 measures tested showed very acceptable levels of reliability, validity, and responsiveness for both clinicians and researchers. The PASS showed slightly better psychometric characteristics than the other 2 measures.

Background and Purpose-Prediction of activities of daily living (ADL) functions at an early stage after a stroke is critical because it enables clinicians to set treatment programs and goals. The objective of this study was to assess the relationship between trunk control at an early stage and comprehensive ADL function (as assessed by combining basic ADL and instrumental ADL [IADL]) in patients at 6 months after stroke. Methods-A total of 169 stroke patients participated in this prospective study. Trunk control was measured with the use of the trunk control items of the Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke Patients (PASS-TC). In addition to the PASS-TC score, age, sex, type of stroke, side of hemiparesis, urinary incontinence, limb paresis (measured by the Fugl-Meyer motor test), balance (measured by the Fugl-Meyer balance test), and basic ADL (measured by the Barthel Index) were also selected as predictor variables. These variables were assessed at 14 days after stroke or earlier. The Barthel Index and Frenchay Activities Index (measuring IADL) were administered at 6 months after stroke. The sum of the standardized Barthel Index and standardized Frenchay Activities Index scores was used to assess comprehensive ADL function. Results-Multivariable stepwise linear regression analysis showed that PASS-TC score, age, Fugl-Meyer motor test score, and Barthel Index score (listed by the order of forward selection) were the strongest predictors of comprehensive ADL function. These results were internally validated with the use of the bootstrap resampling technique. The PASS-TC score alone accounted for 45% of the variance in predicting comprehensive ADL function. Results also indicated that the PASS-TC score had slightly more power in predicting comprehensive ADL function than either the Fugl-Meyer motor test score or Barthel Index score. Conclusions-The findings of this study provide strong evidence of the predictive value of trunk control on comprehensive ADL function in stroke patients. The results imply that early assessment and management of trunk control after stroke should be emphasized.

The results showed that the TUG and the DGI have generally acceptable random measurement error and test-retest reliability. These findings should help clinicians and researchers determine whether a change in an individual patient with PD is a true change.

All 4 measures showed sufficient validity, responsiveness, and reliability in participants with stroke. The UE-FM for assessing impairment and the ARAT for assessing disability had satisfactory minimal detectable changes, supporting their utility in clinical settings.

Background. The interpretation of the change scores of the Barthel Index (BI) in follow-up or outcome studies has been hampered by the fact that its minimal clinically important difference (MCID) has not been determined. Objective. This article was written to establish the MCID of the BI in stroke patients. Methods. Both anchor-based and distribution-based methods were used to establish the MCID. In the anchorbased method, 43 stroke inpatients participated in a follow-up study designed to determine the MCID of the BI using patients' global ratings of the activities of daily living function on a 15-point Likert-type scale. The mean change scores on the 20-point scale of the BI of the MCID group, based on the patients' ratings on the Likert-type scale, served as the first estimate of the MCID. In the distribution-based method, 56 chronic stroke patients participated in the test-retest reliability study to determine the MCID of the BI. One standard error of measurement (SEM) served as the second estimate for the MCID. The larger MCID value of the 2 estimates was chosen as the MCID of the BI. Results. In the anchor-based study, there were 20 patients in the MCID group, with a mean change score of 1.85 points (ie, the first MCID estimate). In the distribution-based study, the SEM based on test-retest agreement was 1.45 points (ie, the second MCID estimate). The MCID of the BI in stroke patients was estimated to be 1.85 points. Conclusion. The authors' results, within the limitations of their design, suggest that if the mean BI change score within a stroke group has reached 1.85 points in a study, the change score on the BI can be perceived by patients as

The preliminary results of this study support the value of the ARAT for measuring recovery of arm-hand function in stroke patients.

No abstract