ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present study was to determine the correlation between the scores of the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) and the Box and Block Test (BBT), commonly used tests of upper extremity (UE)function. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Forty first-time subacute stroke patients without severe cognitive, language, or motion impairment were administered the ARAT and BBT before and after participating in a 4-week rehabilitation program. Their scores were analyzed by Wilcoxon sign-rank testing and by Spearman's rank correlation, standardized response mean, and scatter-plot analysis. RESULTS: The ARAT and the BBT scores have a high level of responsiveness to change and are highly correlated. The BBThas afloor effect compared with the ARAT while the ARAT has a small ceiling effect compared with the BBT CONCLUSION: The ARAT and the BBT scores have excellent concurrent validity and are highly responsive to change, indicating that the BBT can effectively assess UE function.
Subject(s)
Disability Evaluation , Motor Activity/physiology , Recovery of Function/physiology , Stroke Rehabilitation , Stroke/physiopathology , Upper Extremity/physiopathology , Adult , Aged , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Predictive Value of Tests , Reproducibility of Results , Task Performance and AnalysisABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Recovery of upper extremity functions after a severe stroke and traumatic brain injuries (TBI) have generally been less than satisfactory. The "cognitive sensory motor training therapy" is a relatively new method claimed to improve motor control using a specific type of repetitive sensory and motor re-learning protocol. There has been no previous study demonstrating the effectiveness of this method. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the value of the cognitive sensory motor training therapy to improve upper extremity motor function in chronic stroke and TBI patients. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Seven patients with persistent impaired upper extremity functions for over 6 months after a stroke or TBI were trained with the cognitive sensory motor training therapy program. Hand and arm functions were measured with Action Research Arm (ARA) test before the beginning of the study and once a month thereafter. Data were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: There was improvement of ARA scores in all of the trained patients. On average there was an increase of the ARA score of 7.7 points during the average training time of 2.5 months. CONCLUSION: The cognitive sensory motor training therapy may be an effective method for motor rehabilitation of chronic stroke or traumatic brain injured patients. Further prospective randomized control trials are justified and required.
