脊髓损伤躯干评估量表(TASS)和脊髓损伤患者躯干控制测试的有效性。

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-03 DOI:10.1080/10790268.2023.2228583
Hiroki Sato, Kazuhiro Miyata, Kenichi Yoshikawa, Shuhei Chiba, Ryu Ishimoto, Masafumi Mizukami
{"title":"脊髓损伤躯干评估量表(TASS)和脊髓损伤患者躯干控制测试的有效性。","authors":"Hiroki Sato, Kazuhiro Miyata, Kenichi Yoshikawa, Shuhei Chiba, Ryu Ishimoto, Masafumi Mizukami","doi":"10.1080/10790268.2023.2228583","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> The Trunk Assessment Scale for Spinal Cord Injury (TASS) and the Trunk Control Test for individuals with a Spinal Cord Injury (TCT-SCI) are highly reliable assessment tools for evaluating the trunk function of individuals with SCIs. However, the potential differences in the validity of these two scales are unclear.<b>Objectives:</b> To evaluate the criterion validity of the TASS and the construct validity of the TASS and TCT-SCI.<b>Participants and Methods:</b> We evaluated 30 individuals with SCIs (age 63.8 ± 10.7 yrs, 17 with tetraplegia). To evaluate criterion validity, we calculated Spearman's rho between the TASS and the gold standard (the TCT-SCI). To determine construct validity, we used the following hypothesis testing approaches: (<i>i</i>) calculating Spearman's rho between each scale and the upper and lower extremity motor scores (UEMS, LEMS), the Walking Index for SCI-II (WISCI-II), and the motor score of the Functional Independence Measure (mFIM); and (<i>ii</i>) determining the cut-off point for identifying ambulators with SCIs (≥ 3 points on item 12 of Spinal Cord Independent Measure III) by a receiver operating characteristics analysis.<b>Results:</b> A moderate correlation was confirmed between the TASS and the TCT-SCI (<i>r</i> = 0.68). Construct validity was supported by six of the eight prior hypotheses. The cut-off points for identifying ambulators with SCIs were 26 points (TASS) and 18 points (TCT-SCI).<b>Conclusion:</b> Our results indicate that the contents of the TASS and the TCT-SCI might reflect the epidemiological characteristics of the populations in which they were developed.</p>","PeriodicalId":50044,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"944-951"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11533264/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validity of the trunk assessment scale for spinal cord injury (TASS) and the trunk control test in individuals with spinal cord injury.\",\"authors\":\"Hiroki Sato, Kazuhiro Miyata, Kenichi Yoshikawa, Shuhei Chiba, Ryu Ishimoto, Masafumi Mizukami\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10790268.2023.2228583\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> The Trunk Assessment Scale for Spinal Cord Injury (TASS) and the Trunk Control Test for individuals with a Spinal Cord Injury (TCT-SCI) are highly reliable assessment tools for evaluating the trunk function of individuals with SCIs. However, the potential differences in the validity of these two scales are unclear.<b>Objectives:</b> To evaluate the criterion validity of the TASS and the construct validity of the TASS and TCT-SCI.<b>Participants and Methods:</b> We evaluated 30 individuals with SCIs (age 63.8 ± 10.7 yrs, 17 with tetraplegia). To evaluate criterion validity, we calculated Spearman's rho between the TASS and the gold standard (the TCT-SCI). To determine construct validity, we used the following hypothesis testing approaches: (<i>i</i>) calculating Spearman's rho between each scale and the upper and lower extremity motor scores (UEMS, LEMS), the Walking Index for SCI-II (WISCI-II), and the motor score of the Functional Independence Measure (mFIM); and (<i>ii</i>) determining the cut-off point for identifying ambulators with SCIs (≥ 3 points on item 12 of Spinal Cord Independent Measure III) by a receiver operating characteristics analysis.<b>Results:</b> A moderate correlation was confirmed between the TASS and the TCT-SCI (<i>r</i> = 0.68). Construct validity was supported by six of the eight prior hypotheses. The cut-off points for identifying ambulators with SCIs were 26 points (TASS) and 18 points (TCT-SCI).<b>Conclusion:</b> Our results indicate that the contents of the TASS and the TCT-SCI might reflect the epidemiological characteristics of the populations in which they were developed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50044,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"944-951\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11533264/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10790268.2023.2228583\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/8/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10790268.2023.2228583","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:脊髓损伤躯干评估量表(TASS)和脊髓损伤患者躯干控制测试(TCT-SCI)是评估脊髓损伤患者躯干功能的高度可靠的评估工具。然而,这两种量表在有效性方面的潜在差异尚不清楚:评估 TASS 的标准效度以及 TASS 和 TCT-SCI 的建构效度:我们对 30 名 SCI 患者(年龄为 63.8 ± 10.7 岁,其中 17 人四肢瘫痪)进行了评估。为了评估标准效度,我们计算了 TASS 与黄金标准(TCT-SCI)之间的 Spearman's rho。为了确定构造效度,我们采用了以下假设检验方法:(i) 计算每个量表与上下肢运动得分(UEMS、LEMS)、SCI-II 步行指数(WISCI-II)和功能独立性测量运动得分(mFIM)之间的 Spearman's rho;(ii) 通过接收器操作特性分析确定识别 SCI 行动自如者的临界点(脊髓独立测量 III 第 12 项得分≥ 3 分):结果:证实 TASS 与 TCT-SCI 之间存在中度相关性(r = 0.68)。八项先验假设中有六项支持结构效度。识别患有 SCI 的救护车司机的临界点分别为 26 点(TASS)和 18 点(TCT-SCI):结论:我们的研究结果表明,TASS 和 TCT-SCI 的内容可能反映了开发这两项测试的人群的流行病学特征。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Validity of the trunk assessment scale for spinal cord injury (TASS) and the trunk control test in individuals with spinal cord injury.

Background: The Trunk Assessment Scale for Spinal Cord Injury (TASS) and the Trunk Control Test for individuals with a Spinal Cord Injury (TCT-SCI) are highly reliable assessment tools for evaluating the trunk function of individuals with SCIs. However, the potential differences in the validity of these two scales are unclear.Objectives: To evaluate the criterion validity of the TASS and the construct validity of the TASS and TCT-SCI.Participants and Methods: We evaluated 30 individuals with SCIs (age 63.8 ± 10.7 yrs, 17 with tetraplegia). To evaluate criterion validity, we calculated Spearman's rho between the TASS and the gold standard (the TCT-SCI). To determine construct validity, we used the following hypothesis testing approaches: (i) calculating Spearman's rho between each scale and the upper and lower extremity motor scores (UEMS, LEMS), the Walking Index for SCI-II (WISCI-II), and the motor score of the Functional Independence Measure (mFIM); and (ii) determining the cut-off point for identifying ambulators with SCIs (≥ 3 points on item 12 of Spinal Cord Independent Measure III) by a receiver operating characteristics analysis.Results: A moderate correlation was confirmed between the TASS and the TCT-SCI (r = 0.68). Construct validity was supported by six of the eight prior hypotheses. The cut-off points for identifying ambulators with SCIs were 26 points (TASS) and 18 points (TCT-SCI).Conclusion: Our results indicate that the contents of the TASS and the TCT-SCI might reflect the epidemiological characteristics of the populations in which they were developed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine
Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
5.90%
发文量
101
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: For more than three decades, The Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine has reflected the evolution of the field of spinal cord medicine. From its inception as a newsletter for physicians striving to provide the best of care, JSCM has matured into an international journal that serves professionals from all disciplines—medicine, nursing, therapy, engineering, psychology and social work.
×
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