Mensch Sonja M, Rameckers Eugène A A, Echteld Michael A, Evenhuis Heleen M
Intellectual Disability Medicine, Department of General Practice, Erasmus Medical Centre, The Netherlands; Ipse de Bruggen Centre of Expertise in Intellectual Disabilities, The Netherlands; University for Professionals for Paediatric Physical Therapy, AVANSplus, Breda, The Netherlands.
Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, The Netherlands; Adelante Centre of Expertise in Rehabilitation and Audiology, The Netherlands; University for Professionals for Paediatric Physical Therapy, AVANSplus, Breda, The Netherlands.
Res Dev Disabil. 2015 Dec;47:185-98. doi: 10.1016/j.ridd.2015.09.002. Epub 2015 Oct 4.
Based on a systematic review, psychometric characteristics of currently available instruments on motor abilities of children with disabilities were evaluated, with the aim to identify candidates for use in children with severe multiple (intellectual and motor) disabilities. In addition, motor abilities are essential for independent functioning, but are severely compromised in these children. The methodological quality of all studies was evaluated with the Consensus Based Standards for the Selection of Health Status Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) Checklist; overall levels of evidence per instrument were based on the Cochrane Back Review Group strategy. As a result, 18 studies with a total of eight instruments, developed for children with cerebral palsy (CLA, GMFM-88 and LE85), spinal muscular atrophy (MHFMS), neuromuscular diseases (MFM), disabilities 0-6 years (VAB, WeeFIM), and one developed specifically for children with severe multiple disabilities (TDMMT) were found. Strong levels of evidence were found for construct validity of LE85 and MFM and for responsiveness of WeeFIM, but reliability studies of these instruments had a limited methodological quality. Up to now studies of the TDMMT resulted in limited and unknown evidence for structural validity due to the poor methodological quality of reliability studies. In a next step, the clinical suitability of the instruments for children with severe multiple disabilities will be evaluate.
基于一项系统评价，对目前可用的有关残疾儿童运动能力的评估工具的心理测量特征进行了评估，目的是确定适用于重度多重（智力和运动）残疾儿童的工具。此外，运动能力对于独立生活至关重要，但在这些儿童中严重受损。所有研究的方法学质量均使用基于共识的健康状况测量工具选择标准（COSMIN）清单进行评估；每个工具的总体证据水平基于Cochrane循证医学回顾小组策略。结果，发现了18项研究，总共涉及8种为脑瘫儿童（CLA、GMFM - 88和LE85）、脊髓性肌萎缩症（MHFMS）、神经肌肉疾病（MFM）、0 - 6岁残疾儿童（VAB、WeeFIM）开发的工具，以及一种专门为重度多重残疾儿童开发的工具（TDMMT）。发现LE85和MFM的结构效度以及WeeFIM的反应度有强有力的证据，但这些工具的可靠性研究方法学质量有限。到目前为止，由于可靠性研究的方法学质量较差，TDMMT的研究在结构效度方面得到的证据有限且不明朗。下一步，将评估这些工具对重度多重残疾儿童的临床适用性。
