|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
The EXCITE Trial: Attributes of the Wolf Motor Function Test in Patients with Subacute Stroke
Steven L. Wolf
Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, swolf{at}emory.edu
Paul A. Thompson
Division of Biostatistics, Washington University
David M. Morris
Division of Physical Therapy, School of Allied Health, University of Alabama at Birmingham
Dorian K. Rose
Department of Biokinesiology and Physical Therapy, University of Southern California
Carolee J. Winstein
Department of Biokinesiology and Physical Therapy, University of Southern California
Edward Taub
Department of Psychology, University of Alabama at Birmingham
Carol Giuliani
Center for Human Movement Science, Division of Physical Therapy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Sonya L. Pearson
Department of Psychology, University of Alabama at Birmingham
The Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) has been used in rehabilitation studies of chronic stroke patients, but until now its psychometric properties have not been evaluated in patients with subacute stroke. Two hundred twenty-nine participants with subacute stroke (3-9 months postinjury) at 7 research sites met inclusion criteria for the EXCITE Trial and were randomized into immediate or delayed (by 1 year) constraint-induced movement therapy treatment. All evaluations were undertaken by assessors standardized in the administration of the WMFT and masked to treatment designation. Participants were also assessed using the Fugl Meyer Motor Assessment (FMA). Delayed group members had measurements repeated 2 weeks following baseline assessment to determine learning or exposure effects. The results demonstrate that the WMFT differentiated higher from lower functioning participants across sites; scores were uninfluenced by hand dominance or affected side. Women exhibited slower performance times than men. The Functional Ability scale (FAS) portion of the WMFT also revealed lower scores among lower functioning participants and women. Minimal changes were observed after repeating the WMFT among delayed group participants 2 weeks later. The FMA revealed similar results when the total group was divided into higher and lower functional levels at its midpoint score of 33. The WMFT discriminates higher from lower functioning participants tested across research sites. Comparable findings using the FMA support the criterion validity of the WMFT.
Key Words: Stroke • Upper extremity • Function • Rehabilitation
Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, Vol. 19, No. 3,
194-205 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/1545968305276663
 CiteULike  Complore  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
S. L. Fritz, S. Blanton, G. Uswatte, E. Taub, and S. L. Wolf
Minimal Detectable Change Scores for the Wolf Motor Function Test
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
September 1, 2009;
23(7):
662 - 667.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. L. Wolf
On "Effects of forced use on arm function in the subacute phase..." Hammer AM, Lindmark B. Phys Ther. 2009;89:526-539.
Physical Therapy,
September 1, 2009;
89(9):
993 - 995.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. M. Hammer and B. Lindmark
Author Response
Physical Therapy,
September 1, 2009;
89(9):
995 - 997.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J.-H. Lin, M.-J. Hsu, C.-F. Sheu, T.-S. Wu, R.-T. Lin, C.-H. Chen, and C.-L. Hsieh
Psychometric Comparisons of 4 Measures for Assessing Upper-Extremity Function in People With Stroke
Physical Therapy,
August 1, 2009;
89(8):
840 - 850.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Bogard, S. Wolf, Qin Zhang, P. Thompson, D. Morris, and D. Nichols-Larsen
Can the Wolf Motor Function Test be Streamlined?
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
June 1, 2009;
23(5):
422 - 428.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K.-c. Lin, Y.-w. Hsieh, C.-y. Wu, C.-l. Chen, Y. Jang, and J.-s. Liu
Minimal Detectable Change and Clinically Important Difference of the Wolf Motor Function Test in Stroke Patients
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
June 1, 2009;
23(5):
429 - 434.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K.-c. Lin, Y.-h. Huang, Y.-w. Hsieh, and C.-y. Wu
Potential Predictors of Motor and Functional Outcomes After Distributed Constraint-Induced Therapy for Patients With Stroke
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
May 1, 2009;
23(4):
336 - 342.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Y.-w. Hsieh, C.-y. Wu, K.-c. Lin, Y.-f. Chang, C.-l. Chen, and J.-s. Liu
Responsiveness and Validity of Three Outcome Measures of Motor Function After Stroke Rehabilitation
Stroke,
April 1, 2009;
40(4):
1386 - 1391.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Rijntjes, K. Haevernick, A. Barzel, H. van den Bussche, G. Ketels, and C. Weiller
Repeat Therapy for Chronic Motor Stroke: A Pilot Study for Feasibility and Efficacy
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
March 1, 2009;
23(3):
275 - 280.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. K. Rinehart, R. D. Singleton, J. C. Adair, J. R. Sadek, and K. Y. Haaland
Arm Use After Left or Right Hemiparesis Is Influenced by Hand Preference
Stroke,
February 1, 2009;
40(2):
545 - 550.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Thielman, T. Kaminski, and A.M. Gentile
Rehabilitation of Reaching After Stroke: Comparing 2 Training Protocols Utilizing Trunk Restraint
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
November 1, 2008;
22(6):
697 - 705.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I-P. Hsueh, M.-J. Hsu, C.-F. Sheu, S. Lee, C.-L. Hsieh, and J.-H. Lin
Psychometric Comparisons of 2 Versions of the Fugl-Meyer Motor Scale and 2 Versions of the Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
November 1, 2008;
22(6):
737 - 744.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. Sawaki, A. J. Butler, Xiaoyan Leng, P. A. Wassenaar, Y. M. Mohammad, S. Blanton, K. Sathian, D. S. Nichols-Larsen, S. L. Wolf, D. C. Good, et al.
Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy Results in Increased Motor Map Area in Subjects 3 to 9 Months After Stroke
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
September 1, 2008;
22(5):
505 - 513.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Dahl, T. Askim, R. Stock, E. Langorgen, S. Lydersen, and B. Indredavik
Short- and long-term outcome of constraint-induced movement therapy after stroke: a randomized controlled feasibility trial
Clinical Rehabilitation,
May 1, 2008;
22(5):
436 - 447.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. V. Gauthier, E. Taub, C. Perkins, M. Ortmann, V. W. Mark, and G. Uswatte
Remodeling the Brain: Plastic Structural Brain Changes Produced by Different Motor Therapies After Stroke * Supplemental Material
Stroke,
May 1, 2008;
39(5):
1520 - 1525.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. H. Dobkin
Fatigue Versus Activity-Dependent Fatigability in Patients With Central or Peripheral Motor Impairments
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
April 1, 2008;
22(2):
105 - 110.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Caimmi, S. Carda, C. Giovanzana, E. S. Maini, A. M. Sabatini, N. Smania, and F. Molteni
Using Kinematic Analysis to Evaluate Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy in Chronic Stroke Patients
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
February 1, 2008;
22(1):
31 - 39.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Y. Dong, C. J. Winstein, R. Albistegui-DuBois, and B. H. Dobkin
Evolution of fMRI Activation in the Perilesional Primary Motor Cortex and Cerebellum With Rehabilitation Training-Related Motor Gains After Stroke: A Pilot Study
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
October 1, 2007;
21(5):
412 - 428.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. A. Boyd, B. M. Quaney, P. S. Pohl, and C. J. Winstein
Learning Implicitly: Effects of Task and Severity After Stroke
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
October 1, 2007;
21(5):
444 - 454.
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. L. Wolf, C. J. Winstein, J. P. Miller, S. Blanton, P. C. Clark, and D. Nichols-Larsen
Looking in the Rear View Mirror When Conversing With Back Seat Drivers: The EXCITE Trial Revisited
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
October 1, 2007;
21(5):
379 - 387.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. L Wolf
Revisiting Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy: Are We Too Smitten With the Mitten? Is All Nonuse "Learned"? and Other Quandaries
Physical Therapy,
September 1, 2007;
87(9):
1212 - 1223.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Alon, A. F. Levitt, and P. A. McCarthy
Functional Electrical Stimulation Enhancement of Upper Extremity Functional Recovery During Stroke Rehabilitation: A Pilot Study
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
May 1, 2007;
21(3):
207 - 215.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. H. Dobkin
Interpreting the Randomized Clinical Trial of Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy
Arch Neurol,
March 1, 2007;
64(3):
336 - 338.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. H. Dobkin
Confounders in Rehabilitation Trials of Task-Oriented Training: Lessons From the Designs of the EXCITE and SCILT Multicenter Trials
Neurorehabil Neural Repair,
January 1, 2007;
21(1):
3 - 13.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Underwood, P. C Clark, S. Blanton, D. M Aycock, and S. L Wolf
Pain, Fatigue, and Intensity of Practice in People With Stroke Who Are Receiving Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy
Physical Therapy,
September 1, 2006;
86(9):
1241 - 1250.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Y. Dong, B. H. Dobkin, S. Y. Cen, A. D. Wu, and C. J. Winstein
Motor Cortex Activation During Treatment May Predict Therapeutic Gains in Paretic Hand Function After Stroke
Stroke,
June 1, 2006;
37(6):
1552 - 1555.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
