Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of Modified Ashworth Scale in patients with stroke

被引:98
|
作者
Chen, Chia-Ling [1 ,2 ]
Chen, Chung-Yao [3 ,4 ]
Chen, Hsieh-Ching [5 ]
Wu, Ching-Yi [1 ,6 ]
Lin, Keh-Chung [7 ,8 ]
Hsieh, Yu-Wei [6 ]
Shen, I-Hsuan [1 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Chang Gung Mem Hosp, Dept Phys Med & Rehabil, 5 Fu Hsing St, Taoyuan 333, Taiwan
[2] Chang Gung Univ, Coll Med, Grad Inst Early Intervent, Taoyuan, Taiwan
[3] Chang Gung Mem Hosp, Dept Phys Med & Rehabil, Keelung, Taiwan
[4] Chang Gung Univ, Coll Med, Sch Med, Taoyuan, Taiwan
[5] Natl Taipei Univ Technol, Dept Ind Engn & Management, Taipei, Taiwan
[6] Chang Gung Univ, Coll Med, Dept Occupat Therapy, Taoyuan, Taiwan
[7] Natl Taiwan Univ, Coll Med, Sch Occupat Therapy, Taipei, Taiwan
[8] Natl Taiwan Univ Hosp, Dept Phys Med & Rehabil, Div Occupat Therapy, Taipei, Taiwan
关键词
Stroke; Muscle spasticity; Minimal clinically important difference; Psychometrics; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; RELIABILITY; SPASTICITY; OUTCOMES; INTERRATER; CRITERIA; TOOLS; INDEX; TONE;
D O I
10.23736/S1973-9087.19.05545-X
中图分类号
R49 [康复医学];
学科分类号
100215 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: Spasticity is a major problem in patients with stroke and influences their activities of daily living, participation, and quality of life. The Modified Ashworth Scale is widely used to assess spasticity. However, the responsiveness and minimal clinically important differences of the Modified Ashworth Scale in patients with stroke have not been explored. AIM: This study aims to examine the responsiveness and minimal clinically important differences of the Modified Ashworth Scale in patients with stroke. DESIGN: Longitudinal six-month follow-up study. SETTING: Rehabilitation wards of a tertiary hospital. POPULATION: One-hundred and fifteen patients with stroke were recruited. METHODS: All patients underwent the assessment of Modified Ashworth Scale for the upper extremity (flexors of the elbow, wrist, and fingers) and the lower extremity (hip adductor, knee flexor, and ankle plantar flexor) at baseline and 6-month follow-up. The average Modified Ashworth Scale scores of the upper and lower extremity muscles were obtained for analysis. Responsiveness of the Modified Ashworth Scale was determined using standardized mean response, and the minimal clinically important differences were determined using a distribution-based approach with Effect Sizes of 0.5 and 0.8 standard deviations. RESULTS: The responsiveness of the Modified Ashworth Scale in the upper and lower extremity muscles was marked (standardized response mean = 0.89-1.09). The minimal clinically important differences of the average Modified Ashworth Scale of Effect Sizes 0.5 and 0.8 standard deviations for the upper extremity muscles were 0.48 and 0.76, respectively, while those for the lower extremity muscles were 0.45 and 0.73, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The Modified Ashworth Scale was markedly responsive in detecting the changes in muscle tone in patients with stroke. The minimal clinically important differences of the Modified Ashworth Scale reported in this study can be used by researchers and clinicians in determining whether the observed changes are clinically meaningful post-treatment or at follow-up. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: The minimal clinically important differences of the Modified Ashworth Scale reported in this study will enable clinicians and researchers in determining whether changes in the muscle tone are true and clinically meaningful, and can be used as a reference for clinical decision-making. Key words: stroke, muscle spasticity, minimal clinically important difference, psychometrics
引用
收藏
页码:754 / 760
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Responsiveness, minimal important difference, minimal relevant difference, and optimal number of patients for a study
    Comins, Jonathan David
    Brodersen, John
    Christensen, Karl Bang
    Jensen, Jonas
    Hansen, Christian Fugl
    Krogsgaard, Michael R.
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE & SCIENCE IN SPORTS, 2021, 31 (06) : 1239 - 1248
  • [32] Minimal Clinically Important Difference of Scales Reported in Stroke Trials: A Review
    Mishra, Biswamohan
    Sudheer, Pachipala
    Agarwal, Ayush
    Nilima, Nilima
    Srivastava, Madakasira Vasantha Padma
    Vishnu, Venugopalan Y.
    BRAIN SCIENCES, 2024, 14 (01)
  • [33] Responsiveness and Minimal Clinically Important Difference of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure Among Patients With Frozen Shoulder
    Kim, Sun Woo
    Lim, Ji Young
    Kim, Seonghee
    Do, Jong Geol
    Lee, Jong In
    Hwang, Ji Hye
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY, 2024, 78 (04):
  • [34] Minimal Detectable Change and Clinically Important Difference of the Wolf Motor Function Test in Stroke Patients
    Lin, Keh-chung
    Hsieh, Yu-wei
    Wu, Ching-yi
    Chen, Chia-ling
    Jang, Yuh
    Liu, Jung-sen
    NEUROREHABILITATION AND NEURAL REPAIR, 2009, 23 (05) : 429 - 434
  • [35] Estimating the Minimal Clinically Important Difference of an Upper Extremity Recovery Measure in Subacute Stroke Patients
    Arya, Kamal Narayan
    Verma, Rajesh
    Garg, R. K.
    TOPICS IN STROKE REHABILITATION, 2011, 18 : 599 - 610
  • [36] Reply to Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale
    Hui, David
    Bruera, Eduardo
    CANCER, 2016, 122 (01) : 159 - 160
  • [37] An Updated Minimal Clinically Important Difference for the QoR-15 Scale
    Myles, Paul S.
    Myles, Daniel B.
    ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2021, 135 (05) : 934 - 935
  • [38] MINIMAL CLINICALLY IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE (MCID) FOR THE CMT PEDIATRIC SCALE (CMTPEDS)
    Cornett, Kayla
    Menezes, Manoj
    Donlevy, Gabrielle
    Estilow, Timothy
    McKay, Marnee
    Eichinger, Katy
    Shy, Rosemary
    Muntoni, Francesco
    Reilly, Mary
    Yum, Sabrina
    Moroni, Isabella
    Pareyson, Davide
    Finkel, Richard
    Herrmann, David
    Acsadi, Gyula
    Day, John
    Ramchandren, Sindhu
    Shy, Michael E.
    Burns, Joshua
    JOURNAL OF THE PERIPHERAL NERVOUS SYSTEM, 2024, 29 : S192 - S192
  • [39] Minimal clinically important difference: The basics
    Salas Apaza, Julieta Aldana
    Ariel Franco, Juan Victor
    Meza, Nicolas
    Madrid, Eva
    Loezar, Cristobal
    Garegnani, Luis
    MEDWAVE, 2021, 21 (03):
  • [40] An Application of the Minimal Clinically Important Difference Test for the Diabetes Distress Scale
    Banks, J.
    Amspoker, A. B.
    Woodard, L.
    Naik, A. D.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY, 2023, 71 : S244 - S244