Become a Member
StrokEDGE Documents

 
StrokEDGE Members:

Beth Crowner, PT, DPT, NCS, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO

Patricia M. Kluding, PT, PhD, Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Science Department, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS

Diane Nichols, PT, NCS, National Rehabilitation Hospital, Washington DC

Dorian Rose PT, PhD, Research Assistant Professor, Department of Physical Therapy, University of Florida, Malcom Randall VAMC, Gainesville, FL

Rie Yoshida, PT, DPT, Sacred Heart Medical Center at River Bend, Springfield OR

Genevieve Pinto Zipp, PT, EdD, School of Health and Medical Sciences, Seton Hall University, South Orange, NJ (co-chair)

Jane E. Sullivan, PT, DHS, Department of Physical Therapy and Human Movement Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL (co-chair)

StrokEDGE Process:

  • Measures selected for review were recommended by the Section's Stroke Special Interest Group, included in the Toolbox course, and/or those that were included in the Entry-level Neurologic Content Guidelines.
  • A pair of task force members completed initial review of each measure. The psychometric properties of the measures were reviewed using a modified EDGE (Evidence Database to Guide Effectiveness) template (a format recommended by the APTA EDGE task force).
  • Recommendations for use of an outcome measure were rated on a 4 point ordinal scale
    • 4= highly recommended; the outcome measure has excellent psychometric properties and clinical utility
    • 3= recommended; the outcome measure has good psychometric properties and good clinical utility
    • 2= unable to recommend at this time; there is insufficient information to support a recommendation of this outcome measure
    • 1= not recommended; the outcome measure has poor psychometric properties and/or poor clinical utility
  • A modified Delphi process is used by the entire task force to reach a consensus regarding the final recommendations

 RECOMMENDATIONS

All of the recommendations are available in this pdf file. You can also download one page documents that highlight the recommended outcome measures for entry level physical therapy students and for use in the acute hospital and in- and out-patient rehabilitation.

Recommendations for use of each outcome measure reviewed were categorized by 5 practice settings: acute care hospital, in-patient rehabilitation, home health, skilled nursing facility, and out-patient as well as by acuity level. Recommendations for each outcome measure were also offered related to entry level PT education.  Measures were characterized as those that students should learn to administer, should be exposed to, or are not recommended. Finally, measures were categorized as being appropriate for research purposes on a yes/no basis.

Click here for completed EDGE documents of all the outcome measures reviewed, which contains detailed information on the psychometric properties of the outcome measures and references.

In addition, a compendium of information about reviewed tests including unpublished instructions, sources for test ordering, score sheets, etc. was assembled and can be downloaded here.

OUTCOME MEASURES REVIEWED

A total of 54 outcome measures were reviewed in the following ICF categories.

Body Structure/Function
Motor Function
Sensation
Activity
Gait and balance
Arm Function
Trunk Control
Posture
ADL/IADL
Participation

1.    5 times sit to stand
2.    6 minute walk
3.    9 hole peg test
4.    10 meter walk
5.    Action Research Arm Test
6.    Activities-Specific Balance Confidence Test
7.    Arm Motor Ability Test
8.    Ashworth Test (Modified Ashworth)
9.    Assessment of Life Habits
10.    Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BEST Test)
11.    Berg Balance Scale
12.    Box & Blocks Test
13.    Brunnel Balance Test
14.    Canadian Occupational Performance Measure
15.    Chedoke Arm Hand Inventory
16.    Chedoke McMaster Stroke Assessment
17.    Dynamic Gait Index
18.    Dynomometry
19.    EuroQOL
20.    Functional Ambulation Categories
21.    Falls Efficacy Scale
22.    Functional Independence Measure
23.    Fugl-Meyer Assessment of Motor Performance
24.    Fugl-Meyer Sensory Assessment
25.    Functional Reach
26.    Goal Attainment Scale
27.    High-level Mobility Assessment Tool (HiMAT)
28.    Jebsen Taylor Arm Function Test
29.    Modified Fatigue Impact Scale
30.    Modified Rankin Scale
31.    Motor Activity Log
32.    Motricity Index
33.    NIH Stroke Scale
34.    Nottingham  Assessment of Somatosensation
35.    Orpington Prognostic Scale
36.    Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke Patients
37.    Rate of Perceived Exertion (RPE)
38.    Reintegration to Normal Living
39.    Rivermead Assessment of Somatosensory Performance
40.    Rivermead Motor Assessment
41.    Satisfaction with Life Scale
42.    Semmes Weinstein Monofilaments
43.    Stroke-Adapted Sickness Impact Scale-30
44.    SF-36
45.    Stroke Impact Scale
46.    Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement
    a.         Mobility Subscale
    b.         Limb Mvoement Subscales
47.    Stroke –Specific Quality of Life Scale
48.    Tardieu Spasticity Scale (Modified Tardieu)
49.    Timed Up & Go
50.    Tinetti POMA 
51.    Trunk Control Test
52.    Trunk Impairment Scale
53.    VO2 Max
54.    Wolf Motor Function Scale