oru.sePublications
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
Influence of standardized activities on validity of Assessment of Capacity for Myoelectric Control
Örebro University, School of Health and Medical Sciences, Örebro University, Sweden. Centre for Rehabilitation Research, Örebro University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5567-9431
Department of Women’s and Children’s Health , Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7527-3810
Örebro University, School of Health and Medical Sciences, Örebro University, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4247-2236
2013 (English)In: Journal of rehabilitation research and development, ISSN 0748-7711, E-ISSN 1938-1352, Vol. 50, no 10, p. 1391-1400Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The Assessment of Capacity for Myoelectric Control (ACMC) is an observation-based clinical tool that evaluates ability to control a myoelectric prosthetic hand during bimanual activities. Two validity aspects were investigated: potential bias interaction between prosthesis users and activities performed during assessment, and potential bias interaction between activities and different user characteristics (sex or prosthetic side). Six activities were standardized for the ACMC. Upper-limb myoelectric prosthesis users (47 congenital, 11 acquired; 31 male, 27 female, average age 19.9 yr) performed three standardized activities, each on one occasion. Bias-interaction analysis in the many-facet Rasch model identified inconsistent patterns in the interactions of individual users and activity facets and between activities and user characteristics. The standardized activities had no significant influence on measures of user ability. The activities functioned similarly across both sexes (p-value greater than or equal to 0.12) and across both prosthetic sides in persons with upper-limb reduction deficiency (p-value greater than or equal to 0.50) and persons with acquired amputation (p-value greater than or equal to 0.13). The results provide evidence for the validity of the ACMC across the standardized activities and support use of the ACMC in prosthesis users of both sexes and prosthetic sides. The newly standardized activities are recommended for future ACMC use.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2013. Vol. 50, no 10, p. 1391-1400
Keywords [en]
activities, amputation, assessment, bimanual, instrument validation, myoelectric control, prostheses, rehabilitation, upper-limb reduction deficiency, upper limb
National Category
Nursing
Research subject
Caring sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-41681DOI: 10.1682/JRRD.2012.12.0231ISI: 000333658300010PubMedID: 24699974Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84896351017OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-41681DiVA, id: diva2:780918
Note

Funding Agencies:

Health Care Sciences Postgraduate School, Karolinska Institute, Solna, Sweden

Research Committee of Orebro County Council, Orebro, Sweden

Available from: 2015-01-15 Created: 2015-01-15 Last updated: 2019-03-27Bibliographically 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
Keywords
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: 2019-03-27Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records BETA

Lindner, Helen Y. N.Eliasson, Ann-ChristinHermansson, Liselotte M. N.

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Lindner, Helen Y. N.Eliasson, Ann-ChristinHermansson, Liselotte M. N.
By organisation
School of Health and Medical Sciences, Örebro University, Sweden
In the same journal
Journal of rehabilitation research and development
Nursing

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 532 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