Search

Background: Myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1) is a rare multisystemic genetic disorder with motor hallmarks of myotonia, muscle weakness and wasting. DM1 patients have an increased risk of falling of multifactorial origin, and proprioceptive and vestibular deficits can contribute to this risk. Abnormalities of muscle spindles in DM1 have been known for years. This observational cross-sectional study was based on the hypothesis of impaired cervical proprioception caused by alterations in the neck spindles. Methods: Head position sense was measured in 16 DM1 patients and 16 age- and gender-matched controls. A head-to-target repositioning test was requested from blindfolded participants. Their head was passively rotated approximately 30° leftward or rightward and flexed or extended approximately 25°. Participants had to replicate the imposed positions. An optoelectronic system was adopted to measure the angular differences between the reproduced and the imposed positions (joint position error, JPE, °) concerning the intended (sagittal, horizontal) and unintended (including the frontal) planar projections. In DM1 patients, JPEs were correlated with clinical and balance measures. Static balance in DM1 patients was assessed through dynamic posturography. Results: The accuracy and precision of head repositioning in the intended sagittal and horizontal error components did not differ between DM1 and controls. On the contrary, DM1 patients showed unintended side-bending to the left and the right: the mean [95%CI] of frontal JPE was −1.29° [−1.99°, −0.60°] for left rotation and 0.98° [0.28°, 1.67°] for right rotation. The frontal JPE of controls did not differ significantly from 0° (left rotation: 0.17° [−0.53°, 0.87°]; right rotation: −0.22° [−0.91°, 0.48°]). Frontal JPE differed between left and right rotation trials (p < 0.001) only in DM1 patients. No correlation was found between JPEs and measures from dynamic posturography and clinical scales. Conclusions: Lateral head bending associated with head rotation may reflect a latent impairment of neck proprioception in DM1 patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The present paper presents developments and advanced practical applications of Rasch's theory and statistical analysis to construct questionnaires for measuring a person's traits. The flaws of questionnaires providing raw scores are well known. Scores only approximate objective, linear measures. The Rasch Analysis allows you to turn raw scores into measures with an error estimate, satisfying fundamental measurement axioms (e.g., unidimensionality, linearity, generalizability). A previous companion article illustrated the most frequent graphic and numeric representations of results obtained through Rasch Analysis. A more advanced description of the method is presented here. Conclusions: Measures obtained through Rasch Analysis may foster the advancement of the scientific assessment of behaviours, perceptions, skills, attitudes, and knowledge so frequently faced in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, not less than in social and educational sciences. Furthermore, suggestions are given on interpreting and managing the inevitable discrepancies between observed scores and ideal measures (data-model "misfit"). Finally, twelve practical take-home messages for appraising published results are provided. The current work is the second of two papers addressed to rehabilitation clinicians looking for an in-depth introduction to the Rasch analysis. The first paper illustrates the most common results reported in published papers presenting the Rasch analysis of questionnaires. The present article illustrates more advanced applications of the Rasch analysis, also frequently found in publications. Twelve take-home messages are given for a critical appraisal of the results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The present article summarises the characteristics of Rasch's theory, providing an original metrological model for persons' measurements. Properties describing the person "as a whole" are key outcome variables in Medicine. This is particularly true in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, targeting the person's interaction with the outer world. Such variables include independence, pain, fatigue, balance, and the like. These variables can only be observed through behaviours of various complexity, deemed representative of a given "latent" person's property. So how to infer its "quantity"? Usually, behaviours (items) are scored ordinally, and their "raw" scores are summed across item lists (questionnaires). The limits and flaws of scores (i.e., multidimensionality, non-linearity) are well known, yet they still dominate the measurement in Medicine. Conclusions: Through Rasch's theory and statistical analysis, scores are transformed and tested for their capacity to respect fundamental measurement axioms. Rasch analysis returns the linear measure of the person's property ("ability") and the item's calibrations ("difficulty"), concealed by the raw scores. The difference between a person's ability and item difficulty determines the probability that a "pass" response is observed. The discrepancy between observed scores and the ideal measures (i.e., the residual) invites diagnostic reasoning. In a companion article, advanced applications of Rasch modelling are illustrated. Questionnaires' ordinal scores are poor approximations of measures. The Rasch analysis turns questionnaires' scores into interval measures, provided that its assumptions are respected. Thanks to the Rasch analysis, accurate measures of independence, pain, fatigue, cognitive capacities and other whole person's variables of paramount importance in rehabilitation are available. The current work is addressed to rehabilitation professionals looking for an introduction to interpreting published results based on Rasch analysis. The first of a series of two, the present article illustrates the most common graphic and numeric outputs found in published papers presenting the Rasch analysis of questionnaires. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Outcome studies in biomedical research usually focus on testing mean changes across samples of subjects and, in so doing, often obscure changes in individuals. These changes, however, may be very informative in studies in which large or homogeneous samples are unavailable and mechanisms of action are still under scrutiny, as is often the case for trials on new exercise treatments. Single measurements of change may be valid, provided that the reliability of the measurement process (i.e. instrument and procedure combined) was ascertained in a dedicated study in which appropriate statistical models and algorithms were applied. This article summarizes the conceptual steps that allow the calculation of the minimal real difference (MRD, also known as the minimal detectable change), on the basis of the assessment of reliability using an intraclass correlation coefficient. Individuals who show changes beyond the MRD can be reliably considered as changed. A numerical example of an MRD calculation is shown, and the pros and cons of the mean change and the MRD approach are discussed.

The study sought to provide norms for a simple test of visual perception of verticality (subjective visual vertical). The study was designed as a cohort study with a balanced design. The setting was the Rehabilitation Department of a University Hospital. Twenty-two healthy adults, of 23-58 years, 11 men (three left handed) and 11 women (three left handed) were enrolled. A luminous bar was displayed on a PC screen, and rotated in steps of 0.4 degrees until the participant perceived it as vertical. A positive sign was attributed to a clockwise rotation of the bar. The detection threshold was set at the angle corresponding to a perceived vertical, which the participant then selected out of three subsequent alternatives (each at +0.4 or -0.4 degrees). The participant's position (sitting vs. standing) and the preset angle of presentation (clockwise vs. counterclockwise) were balanced across sex. The constant or deviation error (dE, in degrees) and the absolute errors (aE, in degrees) were computed. An analysis of variance model tested the dependence of dE on sex, posture, age, handedness, and the preset angle. Both dE and aE were unrelated to sex, posture, handedness, and the preset angle, but were dependent on age (junior, less than or equal to 43 years; senior, greater than 43 years). The mean dE was -0.14 plus or minus 0.60 in the junior and 0.42 plus or minus 0.64 in the senior group, respectively. The minimal real difference of the dE was 0.75 and 0.25 in the junior and the senior group, respectively. The overall median aE was 0.4 (5th-95th percentile 0-1.2) in the junior and 0.8 (0.4-1.46) in the senior group, respectively. The whole test took no longer than 15 min in healthy participants, and 25 min in stroke patients. The test was applied to three subacute stroke patients with left hemiparesis, of whom two showed left spatial hemineglect. All three patients presented with a significant clockwise dE. This simple test appears to be valid for the routine assessment of spatial disorders in neurological impairments.

ABILHAND is, in its original version, a 46-item, 4-level questionnaire. It measures the difficulty perceived by patients with rheumatoid arthritis as they do various daily manual tasks. ABILHAND was originally built through Rasch analysis. In a later study, it was simplified to a generic 23-item, three-level questionnaire, showing both cross-cultural (Belgium vs. Italy) and cross-impairment (rheumatoid arthritis vs. stroke) validity. Later research returned to the development of impairment-specific versions, with modified item sets and levels. Each version has its own Rasch-derived item difficulty calibrations, which are required to extract the patient's measure from the individual string of responses, through computerized algorithms. All of these hamper the practical application of the scale in rehabilitation units, where patients with diverse conditions may share similar impairments and treatment approaches. In this study through Rasch analysis the "generic" scale was applied to 126 chronic patients with different upper limb impairments, and to 24 healthy controls. It was supported that the generic questionnaire remains valid across a variety of motor impairments. To further facilitate clinical application, a normative cut-off ([greater than]79 of 100) is suggested. Rasch-based item calibrations are provided together with a software routine designed to calculate, on individual patients, linear 0-100 measures and error estimates from the raw scores.

Developed a measure of severity of mental retardation in adults, the Level of Activity in Profound/severe Mental Retardation, scale using Rasch analysis as a guide to item selection. Results from using the scale to rate 146 adults with mental retardation support the use of the scale for classification of severe and profound retardation. (SLD)