Disability and rehabilitation · 2025
Two-handed task performance in upper limb prosthesis users: rethinking measurement approaches.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание 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.
Resnik Linda, Borgia Matthew, Heinemann Allen W, Stevens Phillip, Ni Pengsheng
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The UEFS-P Two-Handed Task scale measures physical function of upper limb prosthesis users. Original scoring assumed a response of not performing a task indicated greater difficulty than the response, 'could not do' a task and collapsed several responses. This study explored alternative scoring approaches.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sample of 423 prosthesis users with major upper limb amputation. Scoring approaches included a partial credit model (PCM) of task difficulty rating, and six generalized linear mixed models accounting for number of tasks performed and task difficulty. Model fit and reliability were compared, and known group validity assessed. After selecting the best model, item fit, threshold and other parameters were evaluated. Concurrent validity with the original score was assessed.
RESULTS: The Poisson and PCM model was selected. Measures were significantly different by amputation level, had the largest F statistic, reliability was 0.78; Pearson correlation with original scoring was 0.82.
CONCLUSION: The new scoring strategy addresses face validity and clinical relevance concerns. Including a count of tasks performed with a prosthesis is part of the latent construct of prosthesis task performance, adding information not considered in a PCM model.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sample of 423 prosthesis users with major upper limb amputation. Scoring approaches included a partial credit model (PCM) of task difficulty rating, and six generalized linear mixed models accounting for number of tasks performed and task difficulty. Model fit and reliability were compared, and known group validity assessed. After selecting the best model, item fit, threshold and other parameters were evaluated. Concurrent validity with the original score was assessed.
RESULTS: The Poisson and PCM model was selected. Measures were significantly different by amputation level, had the largest F statistic, reliability was 0.78; Pearson correlation with original scoring was 0.82.
CONCLUSION: The new scoring strategy addresses face validity and clinical relevance concerns. Including a count of tasks performed with a prosthesis is part of the latent construct of prosthesis task performance, adding information not considered in a PCM model.