Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Research Institute MOVE, VU University Medical Centre Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J Rehabil Med. 2010 Jul;42(7):694-6. doi: 10.2340/16501977-0560.
To investigate the concurrent validity between the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) and the Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) and to compare their reproducibility, internal consistency and floor and ceiling effects in the same sample of stroke patients.
Forty patients participated in this study. Concurrent validity was determined with Spearman's rank correlation coefficients. Reproducibility was assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Bland-Altman plots, internal consistency by means of Cronbach's alphas, and floor and ceiling effects were considered to be present if more than 20% of patients fell outside a preliminary set lower and upper boundary.
Spearman's rank correlation coefficients ranged from 0.70 to 0.86. ICCs for inter-rater and intra-rater reliability ranged from 0.92 to 0.97. Bland-Altman plots showed a less stable way of scoring for the WMFT, compared with the ARAT. Cronbach's alpha was > 0.98 for both scales. No floor and ceiling effects were found.
The present study showed good clinimetric properties for both assessments. The high concurrent validity suggests that ARAT and WMFT have significant overlap with regard to the underlying construct that is being measured.
研究动作研究臂测试（ARAT）与 Wolf 运动功能测试（WMFT）之间的同时效度，并在同一组脑卒中患者中比较两者的可重复性、内部一致性以及地板效应和天花板效应。
40 名患者参与了这项研究。采用 Spearman 秩相关系数来确定同时效度。使用组内相关系数（ICC）和 Bland-Altman 图评估可重复性，用 Cronbach's alpha 评估内部一致性，当超过 20%的患者落在初步设定的较低和较高边界之外时，则认为存在地板效应和天花板效应。
Spearman 秩相关系数的范围为 0.70 至 0.86。观察者间和观察者内可靠性的 ICC 值的范围为 0.92 至 0.97。与 ARAT 相比，WMFT 的评分方式稳定性较差。两个量表的 Cronbach's alpha 值均>0.98。未发现地板效应和天花板效应。
本研究表明这两种评估方法均具有良好的临床计量学特性。高同时效度表明，ARAT 和 WMFT 在测量的潜在结构方面具有显著的重叠。
