| Abstrakt: |
Aims: The purpose of this study was to compare three upper limb ability assessments - the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), Arm Motor Ability Test (AMAT), and Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory (CAHAI) - in acute stroke occupational therapy practice during a 6-month period, to identify whether any or all were appropriate for use in acute stroke care. Methods: Medical records of clients with stroke admitted to an acute stroke unit were reviewed retrospectively. Inclusion criteria were: (a) admission between March and August 2006, (b) new diagnosis of stroke, (c) upper limb involvement, and (d) assessed by an occupational therapist with ARAT, AMAT or CAHAI. Included records were reviewed and the following noted: diagnosis, upper limb weakness, gender, age, assessment score, when assessed, time to administer, test items completed, and qualitative notations. Findings: Thirty three records satisfied the inclusion criteria. A range of stroke subtypes were assessed. The mean ARAT score was 21.4/45, CAHAI was 66.5/91 and AMAT was 3.0/5. The median number of days post-stroke when assessed was 9 days. Conclusions: Overall, ARAT, CAHAI and AMAT were useful for assessment of upper limb ability. The results cannot specifically identify which assessment is most suited to the acute stroke setting. The findings do support the inclusion of ARAT, CAHAI and AMAT in standard clinical care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
