Journal of rehabilitation medicine · 2005
Correlation between a novel upper limb activity monitor and four other instruments to determine functioning in upper limb complex regional pain syndrome type I.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Schasfoort Fabiënne C, Bussmann Johannes B J, Stam Henk J
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine the place of a novel Upper Limb Activity Monitor in the field of instruments measuring functioning and health in upper limb complex regional pain syndrome type I, by exploring the correlation between the Upper Limb Activity Monitor and 4 questionnaires.
METHOD: Subjects (n = 30) were measured at home and correlations were calculated between the Upper Limb Activity Monitor and 4 questionnaires; Sickness Impact Profile, RAND-36 Health Survey, Disabilities of Arm Shoulder Hand Questionnaire and Radboud Skills Questionnaire.
RESULTS: Of the inter-questionnaire correlations 83% were significant, whereas 46% of the correlations between the Upper Limb Activity Monitor and the questionnaires were significant. The number and strength of the correlations between the Upper Limb Activity Monitor and questionnaires was dependent on the degree to which similar aspects of functioning were measured.
CONCLUSION: The Upper Limb Activity Monitor has some correlation with other instruments related to functioning and health, but generally it does not measure the same areas.
METHOD: Subjects (n = 30) were measured at home and correlations were calculated between the Upper Limb Activity Monitor and 4 questionnaires; Sickness Impact Profile, RAND-36 Health Survey, Disabilities of Arm Shoulder Hand Questionnaire and Radboud Skills Questionnaire.
RESULTS: Of the inter-questionnaire correlations 83% were significant, whereas 46% of the correlations between the Upper Limb Activity Monitor and the questionnaires were significant. The number and strength of the correlations between the Upper Limb Activity Monitor and questionnaires was dependent on the degree to which similar aspects of functioning were measured.
CONCLUSION: The Upper Limb Activity Monitor has some correlation with other instruments related to functioning and health, but generally it does not measure the same areas.