This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by van Wijck, F. M.J. Articles by Barnes, M. P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by van Wijck, F. M.J. Articles by Barnes, M. P. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Assessing Motor Deficits in Neurological Rehabilitation: Patterns of Instrument Usage

Centre for Rehabilitation and Engineering Studies, University of Newcastle, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, England

Anand D. Pandyan

Centre for Rehabilitation and Engineering Studies, University of Newcastle, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, England

Garth R Johnson

Centre for Rehabilitation and Engineering Studies, University of Newcastle, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, England

Michael P. Barnes

Centre for Rehabilitation and Engineering Studies, University of Newcastle, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, England

To describe current patterns in the use of clinical scales and measurement tech nology for the assessment of motor deficits in neurological rehabilitation. Question naire, sent to the 2,556 members of the World Forum for Neurological Rehabilita tion, distributed over 75 countries. Sixty-eight questionnaires were returned. Generally, participants indicated that the centres where they were based used a num ber of different clinical assessment scales (median, three), most frequently with a small proportion of patients. The (Modified) Ashworth Scale, the FIM, and the Fugl-Meyer were used most frequently. Only 35 respondents stated that their centre used one or more scales in >75% of their patients, but the choice of such routinely applied in struments varied between centres. The application of measurement technology was re stricted, with video and goniometry being used most frequently. The main barriers to more frequent use of assessment tools were perceived to be a lack of resources, infor mation, and training. The (albeit limited) results from this survey suggest that the assessment of motor deficits in neurological rehabilitation is currently mostly qualita tive and lacks standardisation. More resources and education are required to support a more routine application of assessment tools and to integrate measurement tech nology further in neurological rehabilitation to assist in the process of quantification of outcomes. Key Words: Motor deficits—Neurological rehabilitation—Outcome as sessment—Standardisation—Measurement technology.

Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, Vol. 15, No. 1, 23-30 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/154596830101500104


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				T. Lima, C. Alves, and C. A. R. Funayama Proposal for a Trigonometric Method to Evaluate the Abduction Angle of the Lower Limbs in Neonates J Child Neurol, December 1, 2008; 23(12): 1451 - 1454. [Abstract] [PDF]

				E. Patrick and L. Ada The Tardieu Scale differentiates contracture from spasticity whereas the Ashworth Scale is confounded by it Clinical Rehabilitation, February 1, 2006; 20(2): 173 - 182. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. D Pandyan, C. I. Price, M. P Barnes, and G. R Johnson A biomechanical investigation into the validity of the modified Ashworth Scale as a measure of elbow spasticity Clinical Rehabilitation, March 1, 2003; 17(3): 290 - 294. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P Feys, M Duportail, D Kos, P Van Aschand, and P Ketelaer Validity of the TEMPA for the measurement of upper limb function in multiple sclerosis Clinical Rehabilitation, February 1, 2002; 16(2): 166 - 173. [Abstract] [PDF]