oru.sePublikationer
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Assessment of capacity for myoelectric control: evaluation of construct and rating scale
Örebro University, School of Health and Medical Sciences. Centre for Rehabilitation Research, Örebro University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden.
Department of Occupational Therapy, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Centre for Rehabilitation Research, Örebro University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4247-2236
2009 (English)In: Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, ISSN 1650-1977, E-ISSN 1651-2081, Vol. 41, no 6, p. 467-474Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Objective: To examine the construct and rating scale of the Assessment of Capacity for Myoelectric Control, an assessment to evaluate ability in using a prosthetic hand.

Design: Cross-sectional study. Subjects: Upper limb prosthesis users with different prosthetic levels/sides and prosthetic experience were included (n=96).

Methods: Subjects' assessments with the Assessment of Capacity for Myoelectric Control were collected by 6 raters during their regular hospital visits. Rasch analysis was used, since it allowed an analysis of the data at the item and category levels. Dimension, item hierarchy and item fit statistics were used to examine the construct. Different Rasch parameters were used to examine rating scale structure and its use.

Results: The consistency of item difficulties with clinical knowledge and the unidimensionality confirmed that the construct is valid. Two items functioned unexpectedly (misfit), but the misfit was idiosyncratic to the sample, not systematic to the items. The 4-point rating scale usefully differentiated the subjects on the basis of their abilities. The use of category 2 was somewhat redundant.

Conclusion: The Assessment of Capacity for Myoelectric Control is a valid assessment that evaluates ability in using a prosthetic hand. Revision of the category 2 definition would improve the functioning of the rating scale.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2009. Vol. 41, no 6, p. 467-474
Keyword [en]
Ability, Arm prosthetics, Assessment, Rasch analysis
National Category
Nursing Other Medical Sciences not elsewhere specified
Research subject
Nursing Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-14200DOI: 10.2340/16501977-0361ISI: 000266490300011Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-66349121104OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-14200DiVA: diva2:391468
Available from: 2011-01-25 Created: 2011-01-25 Last updated: 2017-12-11Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. The Assessment of Capacity for Myoelectric Control: Psychometric evidence and comparison with upper limb prosthetic outcome measures
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The Assessment of Capacity for Myoelectric Control: Psychometric evidence and comparison with upper limb prosthetic outcome measures
2013 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Evaluation of outcomes using validated prosthetic outcome measures (OMs) is a current priority in upper limb (UL) prosthetics, and OMs with psychometric evidence toward UL prosthesis users are thus necessary. The “Assessment of Capacity for Myoelectric Control” (ACMC) is a tool that assesses the ability to control a myoelectric prosthetic hand. Some psychometric aspects of the ACMC have been previously investigated, but others are still lacking. A major part of this thesis was thus to search and assess the psychometric evidence of the ACMC. Data were collected from prosthesis users of different ages, prosthetic sides, and sexes. Rasch analysis was used to search for validity evidence and activity influence on the users’ ACMC ability measures, while reliability statistics was used to search for reliability evidence. Overall, the validity evidence was satisfactory in terms of unidimensionality, item technical quality, item difficulty, and relation to prosthetic wearing time. In terms of activity influence, the majority of prosthesis users received similar ability measures in different activities. Reliability evidence was also satisfactory in terms of test-retest reliability and rater agreements (intra- and interrater).

Besides the ACMC, several other prosthetic OMs have been developed in recent years. A comparison of these OMs would help professionals to select appropriate tools for clinical practice. Thus, a comparison of the validated UL prosthetic OMs was performed with an emphasis on what health aspects they cover. Eight OMs were chosen, and their contents were linked to the “International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health” (ICF). The results showed that the contents from different OMs were linked to the ICF categories in “Body functions,” “Activity and Participation,” and “Environmental Factors.”

In conclusion, the use of a mixture of OMs is recommended to cover different aspects of health. Based on the evidence in this thesis, the ACMC can be recommended to measure the ability to control a myoelectric hand.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Örebro: Örebro universitet, 2013. p. 85
Series
Örebro Studies in Care Sciences, ISSN 1652-1153 ; 48
Keyword
capacity, comparison, icf, myoelectric control, psychometric evidence, upper limb prosthesis
National Category
Nursing
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-30071 (URN)978-91-7668-963-9 (ISBN)
Public defence
2013-10-18, Hörsal P2, Prismahuset, Örebro universitet, Fakultetsgatan 1, 701 82 Örebro, 13:00
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2013-07-31 Created: 2013-07-30 Last updated: 2017-10-17Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Lindner, Helen Y. N.Hermansson, Liselotte M. N.

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Lindner, Helen Y. N.Hermansson, Liselotte M. N.
By organisation
School of Health and Medical Sciences
In the same journal
Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine
NursingOther Medical Sciences not elsewhere specified

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 337 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf