Measurement properties of the Activities Scale for Kids

Young, Nancy L.; Williams, Jeremy S.; Yoshida, Karen; Wright, James G.

doi:10.1016/s0895-4356(99)00113-4

Cited by 264 publications

(225 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

214

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…According to our definitions, however, this self-report instrument does not capture a person's capacity -only a person's capability and performance -nor does it separate the domains of mobility and self-care. 25 A recent opinion paper by Morris 26 makes a strong plea for distinguishing capability from capacity and performance. He defines capacity as functioning in an ideal 'standardized' environment, capability as a range of possible functionings (adding 'lived environment' to capacity), and performance as achieved functioning in the lived environment (adding 'opportunity and freedom to choose' to capability).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship between gross motor capacity and daily‐life mobility in children with cerebral palsy

Smits

Gorter

Ketelaar

et al. 2010

Develop Med Child Neuro

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AIM The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between gross motor capacity and daily-life mobility in children with cerebral palsy (CP) and to explore the moderation of this relationship by the severity of CP.METHOD Cross-sectional analysis in a cohort study with a clinic-based sample of children with CP (n=116; 76 males, 40 females; mean age 6y 3mo, SD 12mo, range 4y 8mo-7y 7mo) was performed. Gross motor capacity was assessed by the Gross Motor Function Measure (GMFM-66). Daily-life mobility was assessed using the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory (PEDI): Functional Skills Scale (FSS mobility) and Caregiver Assistance Scale (CAS mobility). Severity of CP was classified by the Gross Motor Function Classification System (48% level I, 17% level II, 15% level III, 8% level IV, 12% level V), type of motor impairment (85% spastic, 12% dyskinetic, 3% ataxic), and limb distribution (36% unilateral, 49% bilateral spastic).RESULTS Scores on the GMFM-66 explained 90% and 84% respectively, of the variance of scores on PEDI-FSS mobility and PEDI-CAS mobility. Limb distribution moderated the relationship between scores on the GMFM-66 and the PEDI-FSS mobility, revealing a weaker relationship in children with unilateral spastic CP (24% explained variance) than in children with bilateral spastic CP (91% explained variance).INTERPRETATION In children aged 4 to 7 years with unilateral spastic CP, dissociation between gross motor capacity and daily-life mobility can be observed, just as in typically developing peers.Gross motor capacity is the ability to use large groups of muscles to keep one's balance and change positions (e.g. sitting, standing, walking, running, and jumping). In typically developing children, this ability is well established by the age of 5 years. 1 In children with cerebral palsy (CP), which is the most common motor disorder in childhood (with a prevalence of 2 per 1000 live births), 2 this ability is not fully established, 3 even in children over 5 years of age with the best functional characteristics. 4 In general, gross motor capacity can be considered an important basis for movement activities of daily living or daily-life mobility. In typical development, children's daily-life mobility gradually dissociates from their gross motor capacity as it becomes increasingly determined by other intrinsic (cognitive and personal) and extrinsic (contextual) factors. 1 Both the concept of gross motor capacity and the concept of daily-life mobility are found within the activities domain of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. 5 Although the two concepts can be distinguished by qualifying them, respectively, as 'capacity' and 'performance', various qualifiers are frequently used interchangeably, causing confusion even within the domain of activities. In the field of motor control, the ambiguity of qualifiers such as 'ability', 'capacity', 'capability', 'skill', and 'performance' has been criticized. 6 In unravelling the complex relationships in the development...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship between gross motor capacity and daily‐life mobility in children with cerebral palsy

Smits

Gorter

Ketelaar

et al. 2010

Develop Med Child Neuro

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To determine their physical function during the week before the injury, the children were asked to complete the performance version of the Activities Scale for Kids (see the section "Outcome measures" for details), with assistance from their parents as needed. [17][18][19][20] Randomization Recruited patients were randomly assigned to receive either a short arm cast made out of fibreglass or a prefabricated wrist splint (W-312 Pediatric Thermoplastic Wrist Support, Benik Corporation, Silverdale, USA). Concealed allocation of treatment was provided by an online program (www.randomize .net) using block randomization with random block sizes of three and six.…”

Section: Recruitment and Baseline Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[17][18][19][20] Physical function was chosen as the primary outcome because it provides clinically meaningful information to families and physicians. Although other outcomes such as angulation and range of motion are also important, their significance rests mostly on the impact they have on physical function and thus were considered as secondary outcomes.…”

Section: Outcome Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…17 The questionnaire has 30 items related to clinicians' and children's perspectives on pediatric daily activities and 8 additional questions related more specifically to activity of the wrist. This modified scale has been used in another trial assessing wrist function after fracture.…”

Section: Outcome Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…15 The scale has been found to be highly reliable, 19,20 have excellent construct validity and be responsive to change. [17][18][19][20] It has been validated in populations of children 5 to 15 years old with fractures and other musculoskeletal problems. 17 Secondary outcome measures included fracture angulation, measured at weeks 1 and 4; wrist pain, measured at weeks 1, 4 and 6 with the use of the Faces Pain Scale -Revised; 21,22 weekly use of the splint, if applicable, measured on a Likert scale; range of motion, measured at week 6 with a goniometer; 23,24 grip strength, measured at week 6 with a dynamometer; and patient preference for their device, measured at week 6.…”

Section: Outcome Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Cast versus splint in children with minimally angulated fractures of the distal radius: a randomized controlled trial

Boutis¹,

Willan²,

Babyn³

et al. 2010

Canadian Medical Association Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Radiograph-Negative Lateral Ankle Injuries in Children

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IMPORTANCE Lateral ankle injuries without radiographic evidence of a fracture are a common pediatric injury. These children are often presumed to have a Salter-Harris type I fracture of the distal fibula (SH1DF) and managed with immobilization and orthopedic follow-up. However, previous small studies suggest that these injuries may represent ankle sprains rather than growth plate fractures. OBJECTIVES To determine the frequency of SH1DF using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and compare the functional recovery of children with fractures identified by MRI vs those with isolated ligament injuries. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A prospective cohort study was conducted between September 2012 and August 2014 at 2 tertiary care pediatric emergency departments. We screened 271 skeletally immature children aged 5 to 12 years with a clinically suspected SH1DF; 170 were eligible and 140 consented to participate. INTERVENTIONS Children underwent MRI of both ankles within 1 week of injury. Children were managed with a removable brace and allowed to return to activities as tolerated. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The proportion with MRI-confirmed SH1DF. A secondary outcome included the Activity Scale for Kids score at 1 month. RESULTS Of the 135 children who underwent ankle MRI, 4 (3.0%; 95% CI, 0.1%-5.9%) demonstrated MRI-confirmed SH1DF, and 2 of these were partial growth plate injuries. Also, 108 children (80.0%) had ligament injuries and 27 (22.0%) had isolated bone contusions. Of the 108 ligament injuries, 73 (67.6%) were intermediate to high-grade injuries, 38 of which were associated with radiographically occult fibular avulsion fractures. At 1 month, the mean (SD) Activity Scale for Kids score of children with MRI-detected fibular fractures (82.0% [17.2%]) was not significantly different from those without fractures (85.8% [12.5%]) (mean difference, −3.8%; 95% CI, −1.7% to 9.2%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Salter-Harris I fractures of the distal fibula are rare in children with radiograph fracture-negative lateral ankle injuries. These children most commonly have ligament injuries (sprains), sometimes associated with radiographically occult avulsion fractures. Children with fractures detectable only by MRI had a comparable recovery with those with sprains when treated with a removable ankle brace and self-regulated return to activities. This work has the potential to simplify the care of these common injuries, safely minimizing the inconveniences and costs of overtreatment.

show abstract

Measurement properties of the Activities Scale for Kids

Cited by 264 publications

References 28 publications

Relationship between gross motor capacity and daily‐life mobility in children with cerebral palsy

Relationship between gross motor capacity and daily‐life mobility in children with cerebral palsy

Cast versus splint in children with minimally angulated fractures of the distal radius: a randomized controlled trial

Radiograph-Negative Lateral Ankle Injuries in Children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About