A comparison of two validated tests for upper limb function after stroke: The Wolf Motor Function Test and the Action Research Arm Test

 Nothing here actually gets survivors recovered, right? SO, FUCKING USELESS THEN?

A comparison of two validated tests for upper limb function after stroke: The Wolf Motor Function Test and the Action Research Arm Test

• Rinske H. M. Nijland
• Erwin E. H. van Wegen
• Jeanine Verbunt
• Renske van Wijk
• Joost van Kordelaar
• Gert Kwakkel

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-0560

Keywords:

stroke, rehabilitation, upper extremity, outcome measure

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: 

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. 

METHODS: 

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. 

RESULTS: 

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. 

CONCLUSION: 

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.

Rasch Validation of the Streamlined Wolf Motor Function Test in People With Chronic Stroke and Subacute Stroke

 

You can see for yourself that nothing in this Wolf Motor Test actually gets you recovered.  To me this type of testing is useless except you'll have to consent since it probably is needed to get insurance to pay. To me it would be much more useful to spend my time doing protocol repetitions leading to recovery than this shitshow.

Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT)

The latest here: 

Rasch Validation of the Streamlined Wolf Motor Function Test in People With Chronic Stroke and Subacute Stroke

Hui-fang Chen ,

Ching-yi Wu ,

Keh-chung Lin ,

Hsieh-ching Chen ,

Carl P-C. Chen ,

Chih-kuang Chen

Physical Therapy, Volume 92, Issue 8, 1 August 2012, Pages 1017–1026, https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20110175

Published:

03 May 2012

Article history

• Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions
• Share Icon Share

Background

The construct validity and reliability of the short form of the Wolf Motor Function Test (S-WMFT) in people with subacute stroke and chronic stroke (S-WMFT subacute stroke and chronic stroke versions) have not been investigated.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to investigate the dimensionality, item difficulty hierarchy, differential item functioning (DIF), and reliability of the S-WMFT subacute stroke and chronic stroke versions in people with mild to moderate upper-extremity (UE) dysfunction.

Design

This was a secondary study in which data collected from randomized controlled trials were used.

Methods

Data were collected at baseline from 97 people with chronic stroke (>12 months after stroke) and 75 people with subacute stroke (3–9 months after stroke) at 3 medical centers in Taiwan. Test structure, hierarchical properties, DIF, and reliability were assessed with Rasch analysis.

Results

The test structure for both versions was unidimensional. No DIF relevant to sex, age, or stroke location (hemispheric laterality) was detected. The tasks of moving a hand to a box and moving a hand to a table in the S-WMFT for subacute stroke showed a significantly high correlation. The reliability coefficients for both versions were approximately .90.

Limitations

The findings were limited to people with stroke and mild to moderate impairment of UE function.

Conclusions

The S-WMFT subacute stroke and chronic stroke versions are useful tools for assessing UE function in different subgroups of people with stroke and show evidence of construct validity and reliability. A high correlation between the tasks of moving a hand to a box and moving a hand to a table in the S-WMFT for subacute stroke suggests that the removal of 1 of these 2 items is warranted.

Reliability and predictive validity of the bedside upper limb functional evaluation tool (BUFET) among stroke subjects – a psychometric study

 

Predictions don't get you recovered! What are the EXACT PROTOCOLS THAT DELIVER RECOVERY?  If you can't do proper stroke research; get the hell out and do something simpler like basket weaving! You're all fired!

You can see for yourself that nothing in this Wolf Motor Test actually gets you recovered.  To me this type of testing is useless except you'll have to consent since it probably is needed to get insurance to pay. To me it would be much more useful to spend my time doing protocol repetitions leading to recovery than this shit. One question to determine patient recovery; 'Are you fully recovered? Y/N?' Then the doctor and therapist should provide EXACT PROTOCOLS THAT DELIVER RECOVERY! Oh, your incompetent? doctor doesn't have those protocols? Then you're screwed, but your doctor still gets paid for incompetence!

Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT)

The latest here: 

Reliability and predictive validity of the bedside upper limb functional evaluation tool (BUFET) among stroke subjects – a psychometric study

• Shruti Mohapatra, 
• Abraham M. Joshua, 
• Shreekanth D. Karnad, 
• Shyam Krishnan, 
• Prasanna Mithra, 
• Zulkifli Misri, 
• Shivananda Pai & 
• Rohit Pai 

Scientific Reports , Article number:  (2025) Cite this article

• 278 Accesses

• Metricsdetails

We are providing an unedited version of this manuscript to give early access to its findings. Before final publication, the manuscript will undergo further editing. Please note there may be errors present which affect the content, and all legal disclaimers apply.

Abstract

The Bedside Upper Limb Functional Evaluation Tool (BUFET) is a newly developed tool that assesses upper extremity functions, including proximal and distal movements such as gestures, gripping, and independent finger movements. This study aimed to evaluate the intra-rater and inter-rater reliability and predictive validity of the BUFET. Subjects ≥ 18 years of age and with a first episode of supratentorial stroke were included. The principal investigator, a physiotherapist, rated the subjects while performing the scale which was videotaped. To establish intra-rater reliability, the same rater re-scored the videos on two separate occasions, after 7 and 30 days. For inter-rater reliability, the principal investigator and 4 additional raters independently scored the patient based on the video. For predictive validity, the Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) was administered on the same day as BUFET, followed by administering the scales after 30 days. Intra- and inter-rater reliability was found to be excellent (ICC—0.992, 0.985). The reliability of all the components was > 0.89. The predictive validity was demonstrated by R2 values were 0.479 when compared with the WMFT scale. The study concluded that BUFET is an instrument with high intra-rater and inter-rater reliability with moderate predictive validity.

Psychometric Comparisons of 4 Measures for Assessing Upper-Extremity Function in People With Stroke

 'Assessments' ARE ABSOLUTELY FUCKING USELESS UNLES THEY POINT DIRECTLY TO EXACT REHAB PROTOCOLS!

Psychometric Comparisons of 4 Measures for Assessing Upper-Extremity Function in People With Stroke

Jau-Hong Lin, Miao-Ju Hsu, Ching-Fan Sheu, Tzung-Shian Wu, Ruey-Tay Lin, Chia-Hsin Chen, Ching-Lin Hsieh

Physical Therapy, Volume 89, Issue 8, 1 August 2009, Pages 840–850, https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20080285

Published:

 

01 August 2009

 Article history

•  Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions
• Share Icon Share 

Background

Functional limitation of the upper extremities is common in patients with stroke. An upper-extremity measure with sound psychometric properties is indispensable for clinical and research use.(NO; It's fucking useless for getting survivors recovered!)

Objective

The purpose of this study was to compare the psychometric properties of 4 clinical measures for assessing upper-extremity motor function in people with stroke: the upper-extremity subscale of the Fugl-Meyer Motor Test (UE-FM), the upper-extremity subscale of the Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement, the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), and the Wolf Motor Function Test.

You can see for yourself that nothing in this Wolf Motor Test actually gets you recovered.  To me this type of testing is useless except you'll have to consent since it probably is needed to get insurance to pay. To me it would be much more useful to spend my time doing protocol repetitions leading to recovery than this shit. One question to determine patient recovery; 'Are you fully recovered? Y/N?' Then the doctor and therapist should provide EXACT PROTOCOLS THAT DELIVER RECOVERY! Oh, your incompetent? doctor doesn't have those protocols? Then you're screwed, but your doctor still gets paid for incompetence!

Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT)

Design

This was a prospective, longitudinal study.

Methods

Fifty-three people with stroke were evaluated with the 4 measures at 4 time points (14, 30, 90, and 180 days after stroke). Thirty-five participants completed all of the assessments. The ceiling and floor effects, validity (concurrent validity and predictive validity), and responsiveness of each measure were examined. Interrater reliability and test-retest reliability also were examined.

Results

All measures, except for the UE-FM, had significant floor effects or ceiling effects at one or more time points. The Spearman ρ correlation coefficient for each pair of the 4 measures was ≥.81, indicating high concurrent validity. The predictive validity of the 4 measures was satisfactory (Spearman ρ, ≥.51). The responsiveness of the 4 measures at 14 to 180 days after stroke was moderate (.52 ≤ effect size ≤ .79). The 4 measures had good interrater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC], ≥.92) and test-retest reliability (ICC, ≥.97). Only the minimal detectable changes of the UE-FM (8% of the highest possible score) and the ARAT (6%) were satisfactory.

Limitations

The sample size was too small to conduct data analysis according to type or severity of stroke. In addition, the timed component of the Wolf Motor Function Test was not used in this study.

Conclusions

All 4 measures showed sufficient validity, responsiveness, and reliability in participants with stroke. The UE-FM for assessing impairment and the ARAT for assessing disability had satisfactory minimal detectable changes, supporting their utility in clinical settings.

An Evaluation of the Wolf Motor Function Test in Motor Trials Early After Stroke

 

You can see for yourself that nothing in this Wolf Motor Test actually gets you recovered.  To me this type of testing is useless except you'll have to consent since it probably is needed to get insurance to pay. To me it would be much more useful to spend my time doing protocol repetitions leading to recovery than this shit. One question to determine patient recovery; 'Are you fully recovered?' Then the doctor and therapist should provide EXACT PROTOCOLS THAT DELIVER RECOVERY! Oh, your incompetent? doctor doesn't have those protocols? Then you're screwed, but your doctor still gets paid for incompetence!

Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT)

The latest here: 

An Evaluation of the Wolf Motor Function Test in Motor Trials Early After Stroke

Dorothy F.Edwards PhD a,b dfedwards@education.wisc.edu Catherine E. Lang PT, PhD b,c,d Joanne M. Wagner PT, PhD e Rebecca Birkenmeier OTD, OTR/L b  Alexander W. Dromerick MD b,c,f,g,h Affiliations & Notes Article Info

Abstract

 Edwards DF, Lang CE, Wagner JM, Birkenmeier R, Dromerick AW. An evaluation of the Wolf Motor Function Test in motor trials early after stroke.

Objective To examine the internal consistency, validity, responsiveness, and advantages of the Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) and compare these results to the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) in participants with mild to moderate hemiparesis within the first few months after stroke. Design Data were collected as part of the Very Early Constraint-Induced Therapy for Recovery from Stroke (VECTORS) trial, an acute, single-blind randomized controlled trial of constraint-induced movement therapy. Subjects were studied at baseline (day 0), after treatment (day 14), and after 90 days (day 90) poststroke. Setting Inpatient rehabilitation hospital; follow-up 3 months poststroke. Participants Hemiparetic subjects (N=51) enrolled in the VECTORS trial. Intervention None. Main Outcome Measures At each time point, subjects were tested on (1) the WMFT and ARAT, (2) clinical measures of sensorimotor impairments, (3) reach and grasp movements performed in the kinematics laboratory, and (4) clinical measures of disability. Blinded raters performed all evaluations. Analyses at each time point included calculating effect size as indicators of responsiveness, and correlation analyses to examine relationships between WMFT scores and other measures. Results The WMFT is internally consistent, valid, and responsive in the early stages of stroke recovery. Sensorimotor and kinematic measures of reach and grasp support the construct validity of the WMFT. Conclusions In an acute stroke population, the WMFT has acceptable reliability, validity, and responsiveness to change over time. However, when compared with the ARAT, the higher training and testing burdens may not be offset by the relatively small psychometric advantages.

Research Paper: The Consistency and Construct Validity of Wolf Motor Function Test With Functional Variables and SF-36 Questionnaire in Iranian Stroke Patients

 

You can see for yourself that nothing in this Wolf Motor Test actually gets you recovered.  To me this type of testing is useless except you'll have to consent since it probably is needed to get insurance to pay. To me it would be much more useful to spend my time doing protocol repetitions leading to recovery than this shit.

Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT)

The latest here: 

Research Paper: The Consistency and Construct Validity of Wolf Motor Function Test With Functional Variables and SF-36 Questionnaire in Iranian Stroke Patients

Kamran Ezzati 1,2,3 * , Mahyar Salavati 4 , Iraj Abdollahi 4 , Hasan Shakeri 4 , Kimia Esmaili 5 

1. Neuroscience Research Center, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran 

2. Poorsina Hospital, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran 

3. School of Medicine, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran 

4. Department of Physiotherapy, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran 

5. Physiotherapist, Rasht, Iran 

Citation: Ezzati K, Salavati M, Abdollahi I, Shakeri H, Esmaili K. The Consisency and Consruct Validity of Wolf Motor Function Tes With Functional Variables and SF-36 Quesionnaire in Iranian Stroke Patients. Caspian J Neurol Sci. 2018; 4(2):49-56. https://doi.org/10.29252/CJNS.4.13.49 A B S  

A B S T R A C T

Background: 

One of the most important indicators for assessing the validity of a scale is the determination of the construct validity of that scale. Since no standard gold test exists to measure the upper limb function in patients with stroke, the study of the construct validity of the Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT) is of particular importance. (Measurements don't deliver recovery! Or are you that blitheringly stupid that you can't understand that simple premise?)

Objectives: 

To evaluate the construct validity of the scores of the Persian version of the WMFT with functional variables, as well as to verify its convergence validity with the physical component summary of the SF-36 Health Survey, and its discriminant validity with the mental component summary of SF-36 Health Survey. Materials & Methods: The tests were conducted on 56 patients with stroke, and the scores were calculated. By using this data, the construct validity of the Wolf scale and the convergence and discriminant validity of the scores derived from the Persian version of WMFT, and the physical and mental component summary of the SF-36 Health Survey were obtained. 

Results: 

There was no significant correlation between the age and duration of the stroke in patients, and the total functional score and the median time of performing the tasks of the Persian version of WMFT (P>0.05). No significant difference was seen between the sexes in terms of the total score of performing tasks, but the median time of performing the tasks was significantly different between men and women (P=0.04). There was a moderate statistical correlation between the scores of the Persian version of WMFT and the physical component summary (r=0.60, P<0.001 and r²=0.74), and the mental component summary of SF-36 Health Survey (r=0.60, P<0.001 and r²=0.82). Conclusion: The Persian version of WMFT has acceptable construct validity with functional variables and the overall score of the SF-36 questionnaire. Keywords: Stroke, Validity, Quality of life, Function

Rasch Validation of the Streamlined Wolf Motor Function Test in People With Chronic Stroke and Subacute Stroke

 

You can see for yourself that nothing in this Wolf Motor Test actually gets you recovered.  To me this type of testing is useless except you'll have to consent since it probably is needed to get insurance to pay. To me it would be much more useful to spend my time doing protocol repetitions leading to recovery than this shitshow.

Wolf Motor Function Test (WMFT)

The latest here: 

Rasch Validation of the Streamlined Wolf Motor Function Test in People With Chronic Stroke and Subacute Stroke

Hui-fang Chen , Ching-yi Wu , Keh-chung Lin , Hsieh-ching Chen , Carl P-C. Chen , Chih-kuang Chen

Physical Therapy, Volume 92, Issue 8, 1 August 2012, Pages 1017–1026, https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20110175

Published:

 

03 May 2012

 Article history

•  Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions
• Share Icon Share 

Background

The construct validity and reliability of the short form of the Wolf Motor Function Test (S-WMFT) in people with subacute stroke and chronic stroke (S-WMFT subacute stroke and chronic stroke versions) have not been investigated.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to investigate the dimensionality, item difficulty hierarchy, differential item functioning (DIF), and reliability of the S-WMFT subacute stroke and chronic stroke versions in people with mild to moderate upper-extremity (UE) dysfunction.

Design

This was a secondary study in which data collected from randomized controlled trials were used.

Methods

Data were collected at baseline from 97 people with chronic stroke (>12 months after stroke) and 75 people with subacute stroke (3–9 months after stroke) at 3 medical centers in Taiwan. Test structure, hierarchical properties, DIF, and reliability were assessed with Rasch analysis.

Results

The test structure for both versions was unidimensional. No DIF relevant to sex, age, or stroke location (hemispheric laterality) was detected. The tasks of moving a hand to a box and moving a hand to a table in the S-WMFT for subacute stroke showed a significantly high correlation. The reliability coefficients for both versions were approximately .90.

Limitations

The findings were limited to people with stroke and mild to moderate impairment of UE function.

Conclusions

The S-WMFT subacute stroke and chronic stroke versions are useful tools for assessing UE function in different subgroups of people with stroke and show evidence of construct validity and reliability.('Assessments' DO NOTHING TOWARDS RECOVERY!) A high correlation between the tasks of m(oving a hand to a box and moving a hand to a table in the S-WMFT for subacute stroke suggests that the removal of 1 of these 2 items is warranted.

© 2012 American Physical Therapy Association

You do not currently have access to this article.