Wheelchair-skill performance: controlled comparison between people with hemiplegia and able-bodied people simulating hemiplegia.

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that able-bodied people simulating hemiplegia (using the hemiplegic-propulsion pattern [1 arm and 1 leg]) have as much difficulty performing wheelchair skills as people with hemiplegia. DESIGN: Single-blind, controlled comparison of 2 groups. SETTING: Kinesiologic laboratory in a rehabilitation center. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty wheelchair users with hemiplegia (HP group) (median age, 68y; 80% men) and 20 able-bodied participants (AB group) (median age, 67y; 75% men). INTERVENTIONS: The participants in the AB group simulated hemiplegia and received a brief period of wheelchair skills training. Participants in both groups were asked to attempt the 50 skills of the Wheelchair Skills Test, version 2.4 (WST 2.4). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Total and subtotal percentage scores on the WST 2.4 and success rates for the 50 individual skills. RESULTS: The mean percentage WST scores for the AB group were significantly greater than those for the HP group for the total WST scores ( P <.001), the indoor skill level ( P <.001), and the community skill level ( P <.001), but the advanced skill level scores were 0% for both groups. On the individual skills, the AB group had success rates at least 25% higher than the HP group for 13 (26%) of the skills. Both groups were generally successful (>/=75% success rate) on 21 skills (42%). Both groups experienced difficulties (

The wheelchair skills test (version 2.4): measurement properties.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the measurement properties of the Wheelchair Skills Test (WST), version 2.4. DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING: Rehabilitation center. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 298 subjects (169 wheelchair users, 129 able-bodied subjects) ranging in age from 17 to 88 years. INTERVENTION: We videotaped subjects as they attempted the 50 skills of the WST 2.4. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The test-retest, intrarater, and interrater reliabilities were determined on a subset of 20 wheelchair users. We assessed construct validity by evaluating whether the WST detected expected changes and concurrent validity by seeing how well total WST scores correlated with criterion measures. RESULTS: The mean time +/- standard deviation taken to administer the WST was 27.0+/-9.3 minutes. There were no serious adverse incidents, and the test was well tolerated. For the test-retest, intrarater and interrater reliabilities, the intraclass correlation coefficients for the total scores were.904,.959, and.968. For individual skills, the percentage concordance ranged from 73% to 100%. Regarding construct validity, there was a slightly negative Pearson correlation between total WST score and age (-.434). Gender was identified as a significant factor on multiple regression analysis (P<.001). Wheelchair users with more than 21 days of experience scored higher than those with less experience (65.0% vs 59.6%; P=.01). Participants with stroke and related disorders had a mean score (55.0%+/-13.9%) that was significantly lower than those in other diagnostic categories (P<.05). Participants using conventional wheelchairs had lower scores than those in lightweight ones (66.4% vs 75.1%; P<.001). Regarding concurrent validity, Spearman rank correlations between total WST scores and the global assessments of the wheelchair users' therapists and admission and discharge FIM instrument scores were.394,.38, and.31. CONCLUSIONS: The WST 2.4 is practical and safe, and its measurement properties are very good to excellent. Further study is needed to determine its usefulness in various clinical settings.

Wheelchair skills training program: A randomized clinical trial of wheelchair users undergoing initial rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that a brief, formalized period of additional wheelchair skills training is safe and results in significantly greater improvements in wheelchair skills performance than a standard rehabilitation program. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Rehabilitation center. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-five wheelchair users (20 with musculoskeletal disorders, 15 with neurologic disorders) admitted for initial rehabilitation. Subjects' mean age +/- standard deviation (SD) was 59+/-18.3 years. INTERVENTION: Subjects randomly allocated to the treatment group participated in the Wheelchair Skills Training Program (WSTP), averaging 4.5+/-1.5 training sessions, each 30 minutes long. Subjects in the control group did not receive any wheelchair skills training beyond that given in a typical rehabilitation stay. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Wheelchair Skills Test (WST), version 2.4, before and after training. Changes in total percentage WST score and individual skill scores were examined. RESULTS: There were no adverse incidents. The control group's mean percentage score +/- SD increased from 60.1%+/-14.4% to 64.9%+/-13.3%, an 8% improvement of the posttest relative to the pretest (P=.01). The WSTP group's mean score increased from 64.9%+/-9.4% to 80.9%+/-5.6%, a 25% improvement of the posttest relative to the pretest (P<.000). The WSTP group showed significantly greater improvements than the control group (P<.000). Among the specific skills, significantly greater improvements were seen in the WSTP group for the gravel and high-curb descent skills (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: The WSTP is safe and practical and has a clinically significant effect on the independent wheeled mobility of new wheelchair users. These findings have implications for the standards of care in rehabilitation programs.

Evaluation of manual wheelchair skills: is objective testing necessary or would subjective estimates suffice?

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that subjective estimates of the ability to perform manual wheelchair skills, by wheelchair users and the therapists working with them, accurately reflect the results of objective testing. DESIGN: Within-subject comparisons. SETTING: Kinesiologic laboratory in a rehabilitation center. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-one wheelchair users and their therapists. INTERVENTIONS: The wheelchair users and their therapists subjectively estimated how the wheelchair users would perform manual wheelchair skills, followed by an objective assessment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Wheelchair Skills Test (WST, version 2.4), a set of 50 standardized skills. RESULTS: The Spearman correlation coefficients between the total objective and subjective scores were.95 for the wheelchair users and.75 for the therapists. The mean difference between the total objective and subjective scores was statistically significant (P=.0002) for the wheelchair users (who overestimated their abilities by an average of 17.9%). The percentage concordance between subjective and objective scores for individual skills ranged from 57.1% to 100% for the wheelchair users and 50% to 100% for the therapists, with 25% and 35% of skills, respectively, for which there were no statistically significant associations (at a Bonferroni-adjusted alpha level of.001) between the objective and subjective scores. The skills that were misestimated by both were moving the armrests away, reaching a high object, transferring out of and into the wheelchair, folding the wheelchair, incline ascent, negotiation of gravel and irregular surfaces, and small curb ascent. CONCLUSION: Although subjective ratings by wheelchair users and their therapists provide excellent and good estimates respectively of overall manual wheelchair abilities, objective testing should be performed when accurate assessments of many specific manual wheelchair skills are required.

The Wheelchair Skills Test: a pilot study of a new outcome measure.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the practicality, safety, reliability, validity, and usefulness of a new Wheelchair Skills Test (WST). DESIGN: A pilot study with within-subject comparisons. SETTING: Rehabilitation center. PATIENTS: Twenty-four wheelchair users (11 with amputations, 4 with stroke, 3 with musculoskeletal disorders, 3 with spinal cord injury, 3 with neuromuscular disorders). INTERVENTION: The WST. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Subjects were videotaped while performing 33 skills twice (>10d apart). Their ability to perform each skill was rated on a 3-point ordinal scale. The test-retest, intra-, and interrater reliabilities were determined. Each subject's occupational therapist completed a visual analog scale (VAS), reflecting a global rating of the subject's manual wheelchair skills. We assessed validity by evaluating whether the WST detected expected changes (construct validity) and how well the total WST scores correlated with the occupational therapists' global ratings (concurrent validity). Each occupational therapist also used a VAS to quantify the usefulness of the WST. RESULTS: The mean time required to administer the WST was 29 minutes. There were no adverse incidents. For the test-retest, intra-, and interrater reliabilities, the correlations for the total scores were .65 (P =.001), .96 (P <.001), and .95 (P <.001), respectively. The 9 therapists unanimously endorsed 30 (91%) of the 33 WST skills. The correlation between the mean changes in the WST and global rating scores was .45 (P <.05). There was a slight negative relationship between total WST score and age (P <.05). There were no significant differences related to the diagnoses accounting for wheelchair use. Wheelchair users with more than 3 weeks of experience with their wheelchairs scored higher than those with less experience (P =.0085). The correlations between the WST and global rating scores ranged from .40 to .54 (P <.05). Through Rasch analysis, we eliminated 6 skills, with the remaining skills comprising a unidimensional screening test of wheelchair ability. The mean VAS score for perceived usefulness was 59%. CONCLUSIONS: The WST is practical, safe, well tolerated, exhibits good to excellent reliability, excellent content validity, fair construct and concurrent validity, and moderate usefulness. This pilot study makes an important contribution toward meeting the need for a well-validated outcome measure of manual wheelchair ability.