Program in Physical Therapy, Washington University, St Louis, MO.
Program in Physical Therapy, Department of Neurology, Program in Occupational Therapy, Washington University, St Louis, MO.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2018 Sep;99(9):1913-1916. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2017.12.025. Epub 2018 Mar 10.
To compare self-reported with sensor-measured upper limb (UL) performance in daily life for individuals with chronic (≥6mo) UL paresis poststroke.
Secondary analysis of participants enrolled in a phase II randomized, parallel, dose-response UL movement trial. This analysis compared the accuracy and consistency between self-reported UL performance and sensor-measured UL performance at baseline and immediately post an 8-week intensive UL task-specific intervention.
Outpatient rehabilitation.
Community-dwelling individuals with chronic (≥6mo) UL paresis poststroke (N=64).
Not applicable.
Motor Activity Log amount of use scale and the sensor-derived use ratio from wrist-worn accelerometers.
There was a high degree of variability between self-reported UL performance and the sensor-derived use ratio. Using sensor-based values as a reference, 3 distinct categories were identified: accurate reporters (reporting difference ±0.1), overreporters (difference >0.1), and underreporters (difference <-0.1). Five of 64 participants accurately self-reported UL performance at baseline and postintervention. Over half of participants (52%) switched categories from pre-to postintervention (eg, moved from underreporting preintervention to overreporting postintervention). For the consistent reporters, no participant characteristics were found to influence whether someone over- or underreported performance compared with sensor-based assessment.
Participants did not consistently or accurately self-report UL performance when compared with the sensor-derived use ratio. Although self-report and sensor-based assessments are moderately associated and appear similar conceptually, these results suggest self-reported UL performance is often not consistent with sensor-measured performance and the measures cannot be used interchangeably.
比较慢性(≥6 个月)上肢瘫痪后个体日常生活中自我报告和传感器测量的上肢(UL)表现。
参与者参加了一项 II 期随机、平行、剂量反应 UL 运动试验,对参与者进行二次分析。该分析比较了基线和 8 周强化 UL 特定任务干预后即刻,自我报告的 UL 表现与传感器测量的 UL 表现的准确性和一致性。
门诊康复。
社区居住的慢性(≥6 个月)上肢瘫痪后个体(N=64)。
不适用。
运动活动日志使用量量表和腕戴加速度计的传感器衍生使用率。
自我报告的 UL 表现与传感器衍生使用率之间存在很大的差异。使用基于传感器的值作为参考,确定了 3 个不同的类别:准确报告者(报告差异±0.1)、过度报告者(差异>0.1)和不足报告者(差异<-0.1)。在基线和干预后,有 5 名参与者准确地自我报告了 UL 表现。超过一半的参与者(52%)从干预前到干预后改变了类别(例如,从干预前的报告不足转变为干预后的报告过度)。对于一致的报告者,没有发现参与者特征会影响与基于传感器的评估相比,某人是否过度或不足报告表现。
与传感器衍生使用率相比,参与者自我报告 UL 表现时并不一致或准确。尽管自我报告和基于传感器的评估具有中度相关性且在概念上似乎相似,但这些结果表明自我报告的 UL 表现通常与传感器测量的表现不一致,并且这两种测量方法不能互换使用。