These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Adapted manual wheelchair circuit: test-retest reliability and discriminative validity in persons with spinal cord injury.
    Author: Cowan RE, Nash MS, de Groot S, van der Woude LH.
    Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 2011 Aug; 92(8):1270-80. PubMed ID: 21807146.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To assess the test-retest reliability and discriminative validity of a 14-item manual wheelchair circuit adapted from previous research (AMWC). DESIGN: Two AMWC trials per subject completed within 15 days. SETTING: Two clinical research and 3 rehabilitation centers. PARTICIPANTS: Convenience sample of individuals with spinal cord injury (N=50) from centers in the United States (n=38) and the Netherlands (n=12). Mean age ± SD was 46±13 years, and mean injury duration ± SD was 12±11 years. Fifteen had cervical injuries, and 42 were men. INTERVENTIONS: An existing 8-task manual wheelchair circuit was modified to remove the need for a wheelchair treadmill and expanded to 14 tasks to attenuate floor and ceiling effects: 5 original tasks-figure-of-8, .012-m doorstep crossing, .10-m platform, 15-m sprint, and making a level transfer; 3 modified tasks-3% and 6% ramp, and 3-minute overground wheeling; and 6 new tasks-.04-m doorstep crossing, propelling over artificial grass, opening/closing a door, 3% side slope, holding a wheelie for 10 seconds, and propelling in a wheelie. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Reliability of the primary outcomes, sum ability score (sum of all tasks; 0-14 [no.]) and sum performance time (figure-of-8 + sprint + grass; 0-360 [s]), was determined by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for the whole sample and paraplegia (PP) and tetraplegia (TP) subsets. Independent t tests compared PP and TP trial 1 sum ability score and sum performance time. RESULTS: Sum ability and sum performance time ICCs exceeded .90 for the full sample and the PP/TP subsets. Sum ability was higher for PP than TP (PP, 12.9±1.2; TP, 9.8±2.8; P<.00), and sum performance times were lower for PP than TP (20.0±4.0s vs 32.0±1.97s, P<.00). CONCLUSIONS: AMWC primary outcomes, sum ability score and sum performance time, are reliable and discriminate between TP and PP.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]