A comparison of two validated tests for upper limb function after stroke: The Wolf Motor Function Test and the Action Research Arm Test

Rinske Nijland, Erwin van Wegen, Jeanine A. Verbunt, Renske van Wijk, Joost van Kordelaar, Gert Kwakkel

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademic

59 Citations (Scopus)
57 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the concurrent validity between the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) and the Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) and to compare their reproducibi­lity, internal consistency and floor and ceiling effects in the same sample of stroke patients. Methods: Forty patients participated in this study. Concurrent validity was determined with Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients. Reproducibility was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland-Altman plots, internal consistency by means of Cronbach’s alphas, and floor and ceiling effects were considered to be present if more than 20% of patients fell outside a preliminary set lower and upper boundary. Results: Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients ranged from 0.70 to 0.86. ICCs for inter-rater and intra-rater reliability ranged from 0.92 to 0.97. Bland-Altman plots showed a less stable way of scoring for the WMFT, compared with the ARAT. Cronbach’s alpha was > 0.98 for both scales. No floor and ceiling effects were found. Conclusion: The present study showed good clinimetric properties for both assessments. The high concurrent validity suggests that ARAT and WMFT have significant overlap with regard to the underlying construct that is being measured.
Original languageUndefined
Pages (from-to)694-696
JournalJournal of rehabilitation medicine
Volume42
Issue number7
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2010

Keywords

  • IR-77790
  • Upper extremity
  • Rehabilitation
  • Stroke
  • outcomemeasure

Cite this

Nijland, Rinske ; van Wegen, Erwin ; Verbunt, Jeanine A. ; van Wijk, Renske ; van Kordelaar, Joost ; Kwakkel, Gert. / A comparison of two validated tests for upper limb function after stroke: The Wolf Motor Function Test and the Action Research Arm Test. In: Journal of rehabilitation medicine. 2010 ; Vol. 42, No. 7. pp. 694-696.
@article{da307d3dd6f94d6ca9816618c0a61baa,
title = "A comparison of two validated tests for upper limb function after stroke: The Wolf Motor Function Test and the Action Research Arm Test",
abstract = "Objective: To investigate the concurrent validity between the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) and the Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) and to compare their reproducibi­lity, internal consistency and floor and ceiling effects in the same sample of stroke patients. Methods: Forty patients participated in this study. Concurrent validity was determined with Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients. Reproducibility was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland-Altman plots, internal consistency by means of Cronbach’s alphas, and floor and ceiling effects were considered to be present if more than 20{\%} of patients fell outside a preliminary set lower and upper boundary. Results: Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients ranged from 0.70 to 0.86. ICCs for inter-rater and intra-rater reliability ranged from 0.92 to 0.97. Bland-Altman plots showed a less stable way of scoring for the WMFT, compared with the ARAT. Cronbach’s alpha was > 0.98 for both scales. No floor and ceiling effects were found. Conclusion: The present study showed good clinimetric properties for both assessments. The high concurrent validity suggests that ARAT and WMFT have significant overlap with regard to the underlying construct that is being measured.",
keywords = "IR-77790, Upper extremity, Rehabilitation, Stroke, outcomemeasure",
author = "Rinske Nijland and {van Wegen}, Erwin and Verbunt, {Jeanine A.} and {van Wijk}, Renske and {van Kordelaar}, Joost and Gert Kwakkel",
note = "Open access article",
year = "2010",
doi = "10.2340/16501977-0560",
language = "Undefined",
volume = "42",
pages = "694--696",
journal = "Journal of rehabilitation medicine",
issn = "1650-1977",
publisher = "Foundation for Rehabilitation Information",
number = "7",

}

A comparison of two validated tests for upper limb function after stroke: The Wolf Motor Function Test and the Action Research Arm Test. / Nijland, Rinske; van Wegen, Erwin; Verbunt, Jeanine A.; van Wijk, Renske; van Kordelaar, Joost; Kwakkel, Gert.

In: Journal of rehabilitation medicine, Vol. 42, No. 7, 2010, p. 694-696.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademic

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of two validated tests for upper limb function after stroke: The Wolf Motor Function Test and the Action Research Arm Test

AU - Nijland, Rinske

AU - van Wegen, Erwin

AU - Verbunt, Jeanine A.

AU - van Wijk, Renske

AU - van Kordelaar, Joost

AU - Kwakkel, Gert

N1 - Open access article

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - Objective: To investigate the concurrent validity between the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) and the Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) and to compare their reproducibi­lity, internal consistency and floor and ceiling effects in the same sample of stroke patients. Methods: Forty patients participated in this study. Concurrent validity was determined with Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients. Reproducibility was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland-Altman plots, internal consistency by means of Cronbach’s alphas, and floor and ceiling effects were considered to be present if more than 20% of patients fell outside a preliminary set lower and upper boundary. Results: Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients ranged from 0.70 to 0.86. ICCs for inter-rater and intra-rater reliability ranged from 0.92 to 0.97. Bland-Altman plots showed a less stable way of scoring for the WMFT, compared with the ARAT. Cronbach’s alpha was > 0.98 for both scales. No floor and ceiling effects were found. Conclusion: The present study showed good clinimetric properties for both assessments. The high concurrent validity suggests that ARAT and WMFT have significant overlap with regard to the underlying construct that is being measured.

AB - Objective: To investigate the concurrent validity between the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) and the Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) and to compare their reproducibi­lity, internal consistency and floor and ceiling effects in the same sample of stroke patients. Methods: Forty patients participated in this study. Concurrent validity was determined with Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients. Reproducibility was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland-Altman plots, internal consistency by means of Cronbach’s alphas, and floor and ceiling effects were considered to be present if more than 20% of patients fell outside a preliminary set lower and upper boundary. Results: Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients ranged from 0.70 to 0.86. ICCs for inter-rater and intra-rater reliability ranged from 0.92 to 0.97. Bland-Altman plots showed a less stable way of scoring for the WMFT, compared with the ARAT. Cronbach’s alpha was > 0.98 for both scales. No floor and ceiling effects were found. Conclusion: The present study showed good clinimetric properties for both assessments. The high concurrent validity suggests that ARAT and WMFT have significant overlap with regard to the underlying construct that is being measured.

KW - IR-77790

KW - Upper extremity

KW - Rehabilitation

KW - Stroke

KW - outcomemeasure

U2 - 10.2340/16501977-0560

DO - 10.2340/16501977-0560

M3 - Article

VL - 42

SP - 694

EP - 696

JO - Journal of rehabilitation medicine

JF - Journal of rehabilitation medicine

SN - 1650-1977

IS - 7

ER -