The motor function measure to study limitation of activity in children and adults with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease

Allard, Louise; Rode, G.; Jacquin-Courtois, Sophie; Pouget, M.C.; Rippert, Pascal; Hamroun, Dalil; Poirot, I.; Bérard, C.; Vuillerot, Carole

doi:10.1016/j.rehab.2014.09.005

Cited by 10 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The SRM of dimensions one (standing and transferring) and three (distal motor function) were considered moderate (SRM = 0.68 and 0.50, respectively) and the total score of the SRM was high (SRM = 0.85). Mean reassessment intervals were much longer than in the present study (27 ± 17 months) 17 . The Motor Function Measure should not be used in intervals shorter than one year to evaluate patients with DMD The present study showed that sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit are more responsive outcome measures.…”

contrasting

confidence: 76%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How often should sitting and rising from a chair be evaluated in patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy?

Hukuda

Caromano

Escórcio

et al. 2017

Arq. Neuro-Psiquiatr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To determine how often sitting/rising from a chair should be assessed in Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) patients to avoid redundant/missing data. Methods: Sitting/rising from a chair was evaluated in 26 DMD children (5-12 yrs), in three-month intervals, over twelve months, with the Functional Evaluation Scale (domain sitting/rising from a chair). Scores were compared by effect sizes (ES) and standardized response means (SRM) (responsiveness analysis). Results: Sit-to-stand showed low-to-moderate responsiveness in three-month intervals

show abstract

contrasting

confidence: 76%

“…Cano et al 28 recommended that the ES should be interpreted with caution and combined with other statistical methods to avoid misinterpretation 28 . Only six studies investigated the responsiveness of one or more tests for neuromuscular diseases 2,16,17,18,19,29 . Most studies used the ES 18 and SRM 2,16,17 in isolation or in combination 19,29 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

How often should sitting and rising from a chair be evaluated in patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy?

Hukuda

Caromano

Escórcio

et al. 2017

Arq. Neuro-Psiquiatr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nos estudos com doenças neuromusculares, as escalas ACTIVLIM (VANDERVELDE et al, 2009), Medida da Função Motora (VUILLEROT et al, 2012, ALLARD et al, 2014, North Star Ambulatory Assessment (MAYHEW et al, 2013), Medida de Independência Funcional (DE GROOT et al, 2006), Índice de Barthel (DE GROOT et al, 2006) e Rehabilitation Activities Profile (DE GROOT et al, 2006) demonstraram responsividade.…”

Section: Responsividade Dos Instrumentos De Avaliação Nas Doenças Neuunclassified

“…Em outro estudo de Vuillerot et al (2012) sobre a responsividade da escala Medida da Função Motora, porém no seguimento de um ano, observou-se responsividade apenas no grupo com 41 pacientes com distrofia muscular de Duchenne (MRP do escore total de 0,91, domínio um de 0,47, domínio dois de 0,68 e domínio três de 0,30). Já no estudo de responsividade da escala Medida da Função Motora em 102 pacientes com Charcot-Marie-Tooth, foi observada responsividade significante do domínio um (MRP=0,68), do domínio três (MRP=0,50) e do escore total (MRP=0,85) apenas em Charcot-Marie-Tooth do tipo II com 27,3 ± 17 meses entre as avaliações (ALLARD et al, 2014).…”

Section: Responsividade Dos Instrumentos De Avaliação Nas Doenças Neuunclassified

O Método nas Pesquisas Sobre a Responsividade de Escalas que Avaliam Doenças Neurológicas

Veríssimo

Fávero

Voos

et al. 2016

CPDD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

RESUMOA qualidade de um instrumento de avaliação é determinada pelas propriedades psicométricas. Estas propriedades psicométricas são a validade, confiabilidade e responsividade. A confiabilidade e validação são as propriedades psicométricas mais comumente avaliadas durante a criação de um teste. Apesar de sua importância, a responsividade dos testes só tem sido realizada nos últimos dez anos, apontando um interesse maior das pesquisas na criação de instrumentos mais sensíveis, para utilização na prática clínica e nos ensaios clínicos. O objetivo do presente estudo foi determinar os diferentes focos das pesquisas sobre a responsividade de um instrumento de avaliação nas doenças neurológicas. As recomendações sobre a melhor abordagem de avaliação da responsividade de um instrumento são ainda necessárias. Várias abordagens estatísticas têm sido usadas, mas nenhuma é considerada padrão. Os estudos sobre a responsividade de escalas são encontrados nas diversas doenças neurológicas, sem um consenso na literatura sobre como investigar a responsividade de um instrumento de avaliação. As pesquisas se dividem entre estudos da capacidade de resposta de apenas uma escala, comparação entre instrumentos de avaliação em uma população, e análise de respostas ao uso de diferentes formas de intervenção. Também diferem quanto ao tempo do período de seguimento e análise estatística utilizada.Palavras-chave: Avaliação, Escalas, Atividade Motora, Análise e Desempenho de Tarefas, Exame físico. ABSTRACTThe quality of an evaluation instrument is determined by psychometric properties named as validity, reliability and responsiveness. The reliability and validation are the psychometric properties most commonly evaluated during the creation of a test. Despite its importance, the responsiveness of the tests just have been performed in the last ten years, indicating greater interest of research in the creation of more sensitive instruments for use in clinical practice and in clinical trials. The aim of this study was to determine the different focuses of research on the responsiveness of an evaluation instrument in neurological diseases. The recommendations on the best assessment approach responsiveness of an instrument are still necessary. Various statistical approaches have been used but none is considered standard. Studies on the scales of responsiveness are found in several neurological diseases without a consensus in the literature about how to investigate the responsiveness of an assessment tool. The research is divided between studies only a scale responsiveness, comparison of assessment tools in a population, and analysis of responses to the use of different forms of intervention. Also differ in the time of follow-up and statistical analysis used.

show abstract

“…Functional capability has been further evaluated in CMT using a validated instrument known as the motor function measure (MFM) that is widely used to assess motor function in neuromuscular disorders. Allard et al, () showed that MFM was both a reliable and valid instrument, which could effectively be used in CMT patients from 4 to 80 years of age. The use of MFM reveals a decline in motor function with age, consistent with the progressive nature of the condition, a decline seen most clearly in “standing positions and transfers” and “distal motor function.” Axial and proximal motor function showed virtually no change, consistent with the known pathology of a peripheral neuropathy.…”

Section: Cinical Featuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Charcot‐Marie‐Tooth 1A: A narrative review with clinical and anatomical perspectives

McGrath

2015

Clinical Anatomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Charcot-Marie-Tooth 1A (CMT1A) is regarded as the most common hereditary peripheral neurodegenerative disorder. This narrative review highlights perspectives around the historically well-established and characteristic anatomical manifestations of CMT1A seen in the feet, legs and hands, in addition to a clinical diagnosis that may be confirmed by electrophysiology, genetic or molecular markers together with the presence of a typical family history. A less well-known perspective is the potential for systemic manifestations and wider complication. The condition is characterised by a progressive clinical picture with unmistakable anatomical and neurological features that have been described since the late 19th century. There remains no cure although supportive, rehabilitative, and surgical regimes may provide helpful management or amelioration of symptoms. Most recently, the emergence of a pleotherapeutic approach suggests distinct promise. Future research focused on a detailed elucidation of the underlying molecular mechanisms underpinning myelin and axonal function may eventually hold the key to successful treatment of CMT1A. Genetic modification would potentially present a cure. Clin. Anat. 29:547-554, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

show abstract

The motor function measure to study limitation of activity in children and adults with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease

Cited by 10 publications

References 28 publications

How often should sitting and rising from a chair be evaluated in patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy?

How often should sitting and rising from a chair be evaluated in patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy?

O Método nas Pesquisas Sobre a Responsividade de Escalas que Avaliam Doenças Neurológicas

Charcot‐Marie‐Tooth 1A: A narrative review with clinical and anatomical perspectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About