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

 Neither one gets you recovered, so useless until you have EXACT RECOVERY PROTOCOLS to assign based on these 'assessments''!

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

Rinske Nijland, MSc 1 , Erwin van Wegen, PhD 1 , Jeanine Verbunt, PhD 3,4 , Renske van Wijk, MSc 3 , Joost van Kordelaar, MSc 1 and Gert Kwakkel, PhD 1,2 From the 1 Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Research Institute MOVE, VU University Medical Centre Amsterdam, 2 Department Rehabilitation Medicine, Rudolf Magnus Institute of Neuroscience, University Medical Centre, Utrecht, 3 Adelante Center of Expertise in Rehabilitation and Audiology, Hoensbroek and 4 Research School CAPHRI, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands

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 loor 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 coeficients. Reproducibility was assessed with intraclass correlation coeficients (ICCs) and Bland-Altman plots, internal consistency by means of Cronbach’s alphas, and loor 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 loor and ceiling effects were found. 

Conclusion: 

the present study showed good clinometric 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. 

Key words: stroke; rehabilitation; upper extremity; outcome measure. J Rehabil Med 2010; 42: 694–696 Correspondence address: Erwin van Wegen, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, VU University Medical Centre, Boelelaan 1117, NL-1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands. E-mail: e.vanwegen@vumc.nl Submitted October 5, 2009; accepted February 25, 2010