Limits...
The Brief Kinesthesia test is feasible and sensitive: a study in stroke.

Borstad A, Nichols-Larsen DS - Braz J Phys Ther (2016)

Bottom Line: A paired t-test compared BKT scores between groups.The BKT score for the contralesional limb was strongly correlated with the MAL-how much (r=0.84, p=0.001), the MAL-how well (r=0.76, p=0.007), Wolf (r=0.69, p=0.02), and the BBT (r=0.77, p=0.006).With further refinement, The BKT may become a valuable clinical measure of post-stroke kinesthetic impairment.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Division of Physical Therapy, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.

ABSTRACT

Background: Clinicians lack a quantitative measure of kinesthetic sense, an important contributor to sensorimotor control of the hand and arm.

Objectives: The objective here was to determine the feasibility of administering the Brief Kinesthesia Test (BKT) and begin to validate it by 1) reporting BKT scores from persons with chronic stroke and a healthy comparison group and 2) examining the relationship between the BKT scores and other valid sensory and motor measures.

Method: Adults with stroke and mild to moderate hemiparesis (N=12) and an age-, gender-, and handedness-matched healthy comparison group (N=12) completed the BKT by reproducing three targeted reaching movements per hand with vision occluded. OTHER MEASURES: the Hand Active Sensation Test (HASTe), Touch-Test monofilament aesthesiometer, 6-item Wolf Motor Function Test (Wolf), the Motor Activity Log (MAL), and the Box and Blocks Test (BBT). A paired t-test compared BKT scores between groups. Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients assessed the relationship between BKT scores and other measures.

Results: Post-stroke participants performed more poorly on the BKT than comparison participants with their contralesional and ipsilesional upper extremity. The mean difference for the contralesional upper extremity was 3.7 cm (SE=1.1, t=3.34; p<0.008). The BKT score for the contralesional limb was strongly correlated with the MAL-how much (r=0.84, p=0.001), the MAL-how well (r=0.76, p=0.007), Wolf (r=0.69, p=0.02), and the BBT (r=0.77, p=0.006).

Conclusions: The BKT was feasible to administer and sensitive to differences in reaching accuracy between persons with stroke and a comparison group. With further refinement, The BKT may become a valuable clinical measure of post-stroke kinesthetic impairment.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

- A: BKT set-up example. B: Box plot of BKT scores (sum of the error incentimeters for the two longest reaches) for ipsilesional and contralesionalupper extremity (UE). C: Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.77 (p=0.006)indicates a strong relationship between the Box and Blocks Test (BBT) andthe BKT. D: Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.84 (p=0.001) indicates astrong relationship between the Motor Activity Log (MAL)-How much scale andthe BKT.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4835168&req=5

f01: - A: BKT set-up example. B: Box plot of BKT scores (sum of the error incentimeters for the two longest reaches) for ipsilesional and contralesionalupper extremity (UE). C: Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.77 (p=0.006)indicates a strong relationship between the Box and Blocks Test (BBT) andthe BKT. D: Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.84 (p=0.001) indicates astrong relationship between the Motor Activity Log (MAL)-How much scale andthe BKT.

Mentions: The BKT was administered with the participants seated in a standard height chair (19inches) in front of a standard height table (29 inches) with vision occluded by acurtain. Participants reproduced targeted reaching movements from a starting locationto a target location on a test page after being guided by the examiner (Figure 1A). The distance from the responselocation to the target location was recorded in centimeters. Additional equipmentneeded to administer the BKT includes a visual shield (Figure 1A) and a tape measure. There were three trials per hand (twolonger reaches and one shorter reach) as can be seen on the test page in Figure 1A. The BKT took an average of 8 minutes toadminister including set-up. Our feasibility outcome for the BKT was whether or notparticipants, who met our criteria, could complete the test with standardadministration7. Our criteria forfeasibility was 90% of participants completing the test. The BKT score used here wasthe sum of the distance from the target in centimeters for the two longest reachesfor each hand, as originally published by Dunn et al.8 (Figure 1B).


The Brief Kinesthesia test is feasible and sensitive: a study in stroke.

Borstad A, Nichols-Larsen DS - Braz J Phys Ther (2016)

- A: BKT set-up example. B: Box plot of BKT scores (sum of the error incentimeters for the two longest reaches) for ipsilesional and contralesionalupper extremity (UE). C: Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.77 (p=0.006)indicates a strong relationship between the Box and Blocks Test (BBT) andthe BKT. D: Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.84 (p=0.001) indicates astrong relationship between the Motor Activity Log (MAL)-How much scale andthe BKT.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4835168&req=5

f01: - A: BKT set-up example. B: Box plot of BKT scores (sum of the error incentimeters for the two longest reaches) for ipsilesional and contralesionalupper extremity (UE). C: Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.77 (p=0.006)indicates a strong relationship between the Box and Blocks Test (BBT) andthe BKT. D: Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.84 (p=0.001) indicates astrong relationship between the Motor Activity Log (MAL)-How much scale andthe BKT.
Mentions: The BKT was administered with the participants seated in a standard height chair (19inches) in front of a standard height table (29 inches) with vision occluded by acurtain. Participants reproduced targeted reaching movements from a starting locationto a target location on a test page after being guided by the examiner (Figure 1A). The distance from the responselocation to the target location was recorded in centimeters. Additional equipmentneeded to administer the BKT includes a visual shield (Figure 1A) and a tape measure. There were three trials per hand (twolonger reaches and one shorter reach) as can be seen on the test page in Figure 1A. The BKT took an average of 8 minutes toadminister including set-up. Our feasibility outcome for the BKT was whether or notparticipants, who met our criteria, could complete the test with standardadministration7. Our criteria forfeasibility was 90% of participants completing the test. The BKT score used here wasthe sum of the distance from the target in centimeters for the two longest reachesfor each hand, as originally published by Dunn et al.8 (Figure 1B).

Bottom Line: A paired t-test compared BKT scores between groups.The BKT score for the contralesional limb was strongly correlated with the MAL-how much (r=0.84, p=0.001), the MAL-how well (r=0.76, p=0.007), Wolf (r=0.69, p=0.02), and the BBT (r=0.77, p=0.006).With further refinement, The BKT may become a valuable clinical measure of post-stroke kinesthetic impairment.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Division of Physical Therapy, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.

ABSTRACT

Background: Clinicians lack a quantitative measure of kinesthetic sense, an important contributor to sensorimotor control of the hand and arm.

Objectives: The objective here was to determine the feasibility of administering the Brief Kinesthesia Test (BKT) and begin to validate it by 1) reporting BKT scores from persons with chronic stroke and a healthy comparison group and 2) examining the relationship between the BKT scores and other valid sensory and motor measures.

Method: Adults with stroke and mild to moderate hemiparesis (N=12) and an age-, gender-, and handedness-matched healthy comparison group (N=12) completed the BKT by reproducing three targeted reaching movements per hand with vision occluded. OTHER MEASURES: the Hand Active Sensation Test (HASTe), Touch-Test monofilament aesthesiometer, 6-item Wolf Motor Function Test (Wolf), the Motor Activity Log (MAL), and the Box and Blocks Test (BBT). A paired t-test compared BKT scores between groups. Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients assessed the relationship between BKT scores and other measures.

Results: Post-stroke participants performed more poorly on the BKT than comparison participants with their contralesional and ipsilesional upper extremity. The mean difference for the contralesional upper extremity was 3.7 cm (SE=1.1, t=3.34; p<0.008). The BKT score for the contralesional limb was strongly correlated with the MAL-how much (r=0.84, p=0.001), the MAL-how well (r=0.76, p=0.007), Wolf (r=0.69, p=0.02), and the BBT (r=0.77, p=0.006).

Conclusions: The BKT was feasible to administer and sensitive to differences in reaching accuracy between persons with stroke and a comparison group. With further refinement, The BKT may become a valuable clinical measure of post-stroke kinesthetic impairment.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus