Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Saturday, July 26, 2025

Validity, Responsiveness, and Clinically Important Difference of the ABILHAND Questionnaire in Patients With Stroke

 'Measurements' DO NOTHING FOR RECOVERY! I'd fire all of you for not understanding the goal of stroke research! RECOVERY, RECOVERY, RECOVERY!  Nothing else!

Validity, Responsiveness, and Clinically Important Difference of the ABILHAND Questionnaire in Patients With Stroke


Tien-ni Wang PhD, OT  Keh-chung Lin ScD, OTR ⁎Ching-yi Wu ScD, OTR a cywu@mail.cgu.edu.tw Chia-ying Chung MD Yu-cheng Pei MD, PhD † Yu-kuei Teng MS Affiliations & Notes Wang T, Lin K, Wu C, Chung C, Pei Y, Teng Y. Validity, responsiveness, and clinically important difference of the ABILHAND questionnaire in patients with stroke.

Objective

To investigate the criterion-related validity, responsiveness, and clinically important differences of the ABILHAND questionnaire in patients with stroke.

Design

Validation and clinimetric study.

Setting

Participants

Patients with stroke (N=51). A total of 51 patients with stroke received 1 of 3 upper extremity rehabilitation programs for 4 weeks.

Main Outcome Measures

The ABILHAND and the criterion measures, including the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS), FIM, Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living (NEADL), and accelerometers, were administered at pretreatment and posttreatment. The score of the ABILHAND, given in logits, was based on the conversion of the ordinal score into a linear measure of ability.

Results

Correlation coefficients (Pearson r) were moderate to large between the ABILHAND and SIS physical domains (.54–.66), fair to moderate between the ABILHAND and FIM-motor and NEADL (.28–.48), and moderate between the ABILHAND and accelerometer data (.45–.54). The responsiveness of the ABILHAND was large (standardized response mean=1.27). The minimal clinically important difference range for the ABILHAND was .26 to .35, and 51.0% of the patients showed a positive change that exceeded the lower bound of a clinically important difference after intervention.

Conclusions

The results support that the ABILHAND is an appropriate outcome measure for assessing upper extremity performance in daily activities in patients with stroke and is sensitive to detect change after rehabilitative interventions. The change score of a patient with stroke on the ABILHAND should reach .26 to .35 logits points to be regarded as a clinically important change.
Posted by at
Labels: , , , , ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)