Psychometric comparisons of 2 versions of the Fugl-Meyer Motor Scale and 2 versions of the Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement

 Measurements NEVER GET ANYONE RECOVERED! I'd have you all fired for incompetency in not solving stroke!

Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement (STREAM) Nothing objective here!

Using Fugl-Meyer for anything in stroke is the height of stupidity, nothing objective in it, so nothing is repeatable.

Psychometric comparisons of 2 versions of the Fugl-Meyer Motor Scale and 2 versions of the Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement

I-Ping Hsueh, MA, Miao-Ju Hsu, PhD, […], and Jau-Hong Lin, PhD+3View all authors and affiliations

Volume 22, Issue 6

https://doi.org/10.1177/1545968308315999

PDF/EPUB

• Cite article
• Share options
• Information, rights and permissions
• Metrics and citations

Abstract

Objective. 

 To provide empirical justification for selecting motor scales for stroke patients, the authors compared the psychometric properties (validity, responsiveness, test-retest reliability, and smallest real difference [SRD]) of the Fugl-Meyer Motor Scale (FM), the simplified FM (S-FM), the Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement instrument (STREAM), and the simplified STREAM (S-STREAM). 

Methods. 

For the validity and responsiveness study, 50 inpatients were assessed with the FM and the STREAM at admission and discharge to a rehabilitation department. The scores of the S-FM and the S-STREAM were retrieved from their corresponding scales. For the test-retest reliability study, a therapist administered both scales on a different sample of 60 chronic patients on 2 occasions. 

Results. 

Only the S-STREAM had no notable floor or ceiling effects at admission and discharge. The 4 motor scales had good concurrent validity (rho ≥ .91) and satisfactory predictive validity (rho = .72-.77). The scales showed responsiveness (effect size d ≥ 0.34; standardized response mean ≥ 0.95; P < .0001), with the S-STREAM most responsive. The test-retest agreements of the scales were excellent (intraclass correlation coefficients ≥ .96). The SRD of the 4 scales was 10% of their corresponding highest score, indicating acceptable level of measurement error. The upper extremity and the lower extremity subscales of the 4 showed similar results. 

Conclusions. 

The 4 motor scales showed acceptable levels of reliability, validity, and responsiveness in stroke patients. The S-STREAM is recommended because it is short, responsive to change, and able to discriminate patients with severe or mild stroke.