Search

Background: Children with cerebral palsy (CP) often experience visual dysfunction that affects motor function and activities of daily living, but no 'gold standard' classification of visual function has been established. In recent years, however, a valid and reliable Visual Function Classification System (VFCS) for children with CP has been developed. Aims: To examine the reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the VFCS in individuals with CP. Methods: The translation of the VFCS was performed according to international standards for the translation of measurements. We conducted questionnaires of professionals (three physicians, eight physical therapists, five occupational therapists, six speech–language–hearing therapists and a certified orthoptist) regarding the content validity of the Japanese version of the VFCS. For reliability and concurrent validity, 148 individuals with CP were classified twice by professionals using the Japanese version of the VFCS, Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS), Manual Ability Classification System (MACS), Communication Function Classification System (CFCS) and Eating and Drinking Ability Classification System (EDACS), with several weeks between each evaluation. Results: The content validity of the Japanese version of the VFCS almost met the criteria set. The percentage of positive and neutral opinions given by the professionals with regard to the four items ranged from 74% to 92%. The intra‐rater reliability was 0.86 (95% CI 0.75–0.96) by Cohen's kappa and 0.93 (95% CI 0.88–0.96) by intraclass correlation coefficient. The inter‐rater reliability was 0.67 (95% CI 0.56–0.78) by Cohen's kappa and 0.79 (95% CI 0.69–0.86) by intraclass correlation coefficient. The Spearman correlation coefficients between the VFCS and the GMFCS, MACS, CFCS and EDACS were 0.783, 0.764, 0.738, 0.738 and 0.830, respectively. The concurrent validity was confirmed by the correlations observed with other classification systems. Conclusions: The results indicated good reliability and validity for the Japanese version of the VFCS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We aimed to translate the Early Clinical Assessment of Balance (ECAB) from English to Japanese and examine the content validity, inter-rater reliability, intra-rater reliability, construct validity, and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for children with cerebral palsy (CP). The ECAB was translated into Japanese per international standards. The study included 106 children with CP and, aged 1.5–12 years. The ECAB, the Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS), and the Gross Motor Function Measure 66 Basal & Ceiling (GMFM-66-B&C) were measured. The content and construct validity were examined based on therapist feedback and correlations between the ECAB and GMFM-66-B&C. The inter-rater reliability and the intra-rater reliability were examined by the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). The MCID was calculated by the anchor-based method with the GMFM-66-B&C. High content validity (more than 80% agreement), inter-rater and intra-rater reliability (ICC = 0.99 & 0.99, respectively), and construct validity (r = 0.96) were demonstrated, with MCID values of 7.39, 5.32, and 6.88 observed for the GMFCS I/II, III, and IV/V, respectively. The Japanese version of the ECAB is a reliable and valid measure of balance ability in children with CP. Furthermore, the MCID of the ECAB was established, appears to be useful in helping to provide rehabilitation. The Japanese version of the Early Clinical Assessment of Balance is easy, safe, and low-cost, and has high reliability and validity for assessing balance ability in children with cerebral palsy. The use of the Japanese version of the Early Clinical Assessment of Balance is beneficial for determining the therapeutic effect, appropriate treatment, and prediction of prognosis regarding balance ability in children with cerebral palsy. The minimal detectable change of the Japanese version of the ECAB suggest that a score exceeding 6 is a true change and the minimal clinically important difference of the Japanese version of the ECAB suggest that the scores exceeding 8, 6, and 7 for the GMFCS I/II, III, and IV/V, respectively, is a clinically useful change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective:The aims of this systematic review were to identify quick, simple and easy-to-use measures of walking ability currently used to assess children and adolescents with cerebral palsy (CP), and to evaluate the clinical utility and psychometric properties of these measures. Data sources:The PubMed, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus and MEDLINE databases were searched up to March 2015. Review methods:Two independent reviewers rated the methodological quality of the identified measures using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist. Results:The 1-Minute Walk Test, Timed Up and Go Test, ABILOCO-Kids, Gillette Functional Assessment Questionnaire and Functional Mobility Scale were identified. Each measure can be carried out within 5 min with limited equipment, and does not require examiner training. There was “limited” to “strong” evidence on the reliability and validity of these measurements, whereas evidence on measurement error and responsiveness was limited. Conclusion:The identified measures in this systematic review may be considered for the clinical measurement of walking ability in children and adolescents with CP in a quick, simple and easy-to-use manner. However, there is overall a lack of evidence on the psychometric properties of these tools. The lack of evidence regarding measurement error and responsiveness might limit their value in measuring change over time.Implications for RehabilitationThe ABILOCO-Kids, 1-Minute Walk Test, Timed Up and Go Test, Gillette Functional Assessment Questionnaire, Functional Mobility Scale can be performed within 5 min with limited equipment, and do not require examiner training for measuring of walking ability in children and adolescents with cerebral palsy.The clinicians should use these measurement tools carefully when assessing change over time as the available evidence on measurement error and responsiveness is limited.When clinicians use these measurement tools, the psychometric properties reported in this systematic review should be considered in the selection of tools and subsequent interpretation of results. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]