Test-retest reliability and practice effects of shape trail test in stroke patients.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION
Xiuzhen Liu, Ye Zhang, Fang Li, Lin Liu, Jubao Du, Wei Qun Song
{"title":"Test-retest reliability and practice effects of shape trail test in stroke patients.","authors":"Xiuzhen Liu, Ye Zhang, Fang Li, Lin Liu, Jubao Du, Wei Qun Song","doi":"10.1080/10749357.2025.2457282","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Executive dysfunction after stroke greatly affects stroke prognosis, so clinicians need to urgently focus on screening for it. This study aims to offer valuable data for research on post-stroke executive dysfunction by evaluating the test-retest reliability of the Shape Trail Test (STT) and the influence of the practice effect on scores among stroke patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 75 subacute stroke patients were included in the study. Based on the cutoff value for mild cognitive impairment(MCI) in the Chinese version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment-Basic, the patients were divided into an MCI group and a cognitively normal (CN) group. The patients were asked to complete the Shape Trail Test (STT) on two different occasions within three days. The time taken to complete Part A and Part B were denoted as STT-A and STT-B respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficient(ICC), Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients were used as metrics, and a paired t test was employed to evaluate the practice effect.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>(1) The actual number of patients who completed the research was 71. The STT showed great test-retest reliability in stroke patients (ICC, STTA: 0.927 VS STTB: 0.881; Spearman, STTA: 0.824 VS STTB: 0.713, <i>n</i> = 71). The test-retest reliability of STTA is higher than that of STTB (ICC, STTA = 0.927>STTB = 0.881; Spearman, STTA = 0.824>STTB = 0.713; <i>n</i> = 71). The reliability of the MCI group was higher than that of the CN group (ICC, STTA:MCI = 0.94>CN = 0.71; STTB:MCI = 0.87>CN = 0.64). (2) Subgroup analysis revealed distinct practice effects between the MCI and CN groups. The MCI group showed no practice effect, while the CN group had a partial one. In the CN group, practice did not significantly impact STT-A scores (<i>p</i> = 0.782), but did affect STT-B scores (<i>p</i> = 0.035). In contrast, in the MCI group, no significant practice effects on the STT were observed (<i>p</i> > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>STT's test-retest reliability was moderate to high in stroke patients and varied by cognitive function. Subgroup analyses should precede assessments of STT's test-retest reliability in stroke patients. Patients with cognitive dysfunction showed no significant practice effects. Given that this research is carried out specifically within the Chinese context, extreme care should be taken in extending the study's findings to other populations.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01322607.</p>","PeriodicalId":23164,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10749357.2025.2457282","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Executive dysfunction after stroke greatly affects stroke prognosis, so clinicians need to urgently focus on screening for it. This study aims to offer valuable data for research on post-stroke executive dysfunction by evaluating the test-retest reliability of the Shape Trail Test (STT) and the influence of the practice effect on scores among stroke patients.

Methods: A total of 75 subacute stroke patients were included in the study. Based on the cutoff value for mild cognitive impairment(MCI) in the Chinese version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment-Basic, the patients were divided into an MCI group and a cognitively normal (CN) group. The patients were asked to complete the Shape Trail Test (STT) on two different occasions within three days. The time taken to complete Part A and Part B were denoted as STT-A and STT-B respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficient(ICC), Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients were used as metrics, and a paired t test was employed to evaluate the practice effect.

Results: (1) The actual number of patients who completed the research was 71. The STT showed great test-retest reliability in stroke patients (ICC, STTA: 0.927 VS STTB: 0.881; Spearman, STTA: 0.824 VS STTB: 0.713, n = 71). The test-retest reliability of STTA is higher than that of STTB (ICC, STTA = 0.927>STTB = 0.881; Spearman, STTA = 0.824>STTB = 0.713; n = 71). The reliability of the MCI group was higher than that of the CN group (ICC, STTA:MCI = 0.94>CN = 0.71; STTB:MCI = 0.87>CN = 0.64). (2) Subgroup analysis revealed distinct practice effects between the MCI and CN groups. The MCI group showed no practice effect, while the CN group had a partial one. In the CN group, practice did not significantly impact STT-A scores (p = 0.782), but did affect STT-B scores (p = 0.035). In contrast, in the MCI group, no significant practice effects on the STT were observed (p > 0.05).

Conclusions: STT's test-retest reliability was moderate to high in stroke patients and varied by cognitive function. Subgroup analyses should precede assessments of STT's test-retest reliability in stroke patients. Patients with cognitive dysfunction showed no significant practice effects. Given that this research is carried out specifically within the Chinese context, extreme care should be taken in extending the study's findings to other populations.

Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01322607.

形状轨迹测验在脑卒中患者中的重测信度及实践效果。
目的:脑卒中后执行功能障碍严重影响脑卒中预后,临床医生迫切需要重视对其进行筛查。本研究旨在通过评估形状轨迹测验(STT)的重测信度及练习效果对脑卒中患者执行功能障碍的影响,为脑卒中后执行功能障碍的研究提供有价值的数据。方法:将75例亚急性脑卒中患者纳入研究。根据中文版《蒙特利尔认知评估基础》中轻度认知障碍(MCI)的临界值,将患者分为轻度认知障碍组和认知正常组。患者被要求在三天内两次不同的场合完成形状跟踪测试(STT)。完成A部分和B部分的时间分别用STT-A和STT-B表示。以类内相关系数(ICC)、Pearson和Spearman相关系数为指标,采用配对t检验评价实践效果。结果:(1)实际完成研究的患者人数为71人。卒中患者STT重测信度较高(ICC, STTA: 0.927 VS STTB: 0.881;Spearman, STTA: 0.824 VS STTB: 0.713, n = 71)。STTA的重测信度高于STTB (ICC, STTA = 0.927>STTB = 0.881;Spearman, STTA = 0.824>STTB = 0.713;n = 71)。MCI组的信度高于CN组(ICC, STTA:MCI = 0.94>CN = 0.71;sttb: mci = 0.87> cn = 0.64)。(2)亚组分析显示MCI组和CN组的实践效果明显。MCI组无练习效果,CN组有部分练习效果。在CN组中,练习对STT-A评分无显著影响(p = 0.782),但对STT-B评分有显著影响(p = 0.035)。相比之下,在MCI组中,没有观察到练习对STT的显著影响(p < 0.05)。结论:脑卒中患者STT的重测信度为中高,且因认知功能的不同而不同。在评估卒中患者STT的重测信度之前,应先进行亚组分析。认知功能障碍患者无明显的练习效果。鉴于本研究是专门在中国背景下进行的,在将研究结果推广到其他人群时应格外小心。注册地址:http://www.clinicaltrials.gov。唯一标识符:NCT01322607。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation
Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation 医学-康复医学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
4.50%
发文量
57
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation is the leading journal devoted to the study and dissemination of interdisciplinary, evidence-based, clinical information related to stroke rehabilitation. The journal’s scope covers physical medicine and rehabilitation, neurology, neurorehabilitation, neural engineering and therapeutics, neuropsychology and cognition, optimization of the rehabilitation system, robotics and biomechanics, pain management, nursing, physical therapy, cardiopulmonary fitness, mobility, occupational therapy, speech pathology and communication. There is a particular focus on stroke recovery, improving rehabilitation outcomes, quality of life, activities of daily living, motor control, family and care givers, and community issues. The journal reviews and reports clinical practices, clinical trials, state-of-the-art concepts, and new developments in stroke research and patient care. Both primary research papers, reviews of existing literature, and invited editorials, are included. Sharply-focused, single-issue topics, and the latest in clinical research, provide in-depth knowledge.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信