Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Psychometric evaluation of the brachial assessment tool part 1: reproducibility.|
|Epworth Authors:||Hill, Bridget|
|Other Authors:||Ferris, Scott|
|Keywords:||Brachial Plexus Injury|
Reproducibility of Results
Brachial Assessment Tool
Epworth-Monash Rehabilitation Medicine Unit, Epworth HealthCare, Victoria, Australia
Rehabilitation, Mental Health and Chronic Pain Clinical Institute, Epworth HealthCare, Victoria, Australia
|Citation:||Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2018 Apr;99(4):629-634|
|Abstract:||OBJECTIVE: To evaluate reproducibility (reliability and agreement) of the Brachial Assessment Tool (BrAT), a new patient-reported outcome measure for adults with traumatic brachial plexus injury (BPI). DESIGN: Prospective repeated-measure design. SETTING: Outpatient clinics. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with confirmed traumatic BPI (N=43; age range, 19-82y). INTERVENTIONS: People with BPI completed the 31-item 4-response BrAT twice, 2 weeks apart. Results for the 3 subscales and summed score were compared at time 1 and time 2 to determine reliability, including systematic differences using paired t tests, test retest using intraclass correlation coefficient model 1,1 (ICC1,1), and internal consistency using Cronbach α. Agreement parameters included standard error of measurement, minimal detectable change, and limits of agreement. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: BrAT. RESULTS: Test-retest reliability was excellent (ICC1,1=.90-.97). Internal consistency was high (Cronbach α=.90-.98). Measurement error was relatively low (standard error of measurement range, 3.1-8.8). A change of >4 for subscale 1, >6 for subscale 2, >4 for subscale 3, and >10 for the summed score is indicative of change over and above measurement error. Limits of agreement ranged from ±4.4 (subscale 3) to 11.61 (summed score). CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the use of the BrAT as a reproducible patient-reported outcome measure for adults with traumatic BPI with evidence of appropriate reliability and agreement for both individual and group comparisons. Further psychometric testing is required to establish the construct validity and responsiveness of the BrAT.|
|Journal Title:||Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation|
|Affiliated Organisations:||Menzies Health Institute, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.|
The Alfred, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
|Type of Clinical Study or Trial:||Prospective Study|
|Appears in Collections:||Rehabilitation|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in EKB are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.