Skip to search boxSkip to navigationSkip to main content

A Comparison of the Ability of Two Upper Extremity Assessments to Measure Change in Function

  • Leigh A. Lehman(corresponding author)
    ,
  • Bhagwant S. Sindhu
    ,
  • Orit Shechtman
    ,
  • Sergio Romero
    ,
  • Craig A. Velozo
*Corresponding author for this work
  • University of South Carolina - Upstate
    ,
  • University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
    ,
  • University of Florida
    ,
  • System Rehabilitation Outcomes Research Center
Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Abstract

Study Design: Retrospective Measurement Comparison. Introduction: Upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders affect millions, thus, discerning optimal assessments for measuring change in upper extremity function is critical. Purpose of the Study: To compare responsiveness (ability to measure change) of the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) and Upper Extremity Functional Index (UEFI). Methods: Statistical analyses included Rasch analysis to place the instruments on the same scale, analysis of variance to compare change scores, correlations to compare change scores with global ratings, and the use of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves to determine meaningful change scores and overall error. Results: Change scores on the DASH and UEFI and correlations between change scores and global ratings were similar. Areas under the ROC curves for the DASH and UEFI were 67% and 65%, respectively. Conclusions: Neither assessment has a clear advantage over the other when measuring clinical change. Level of Evidence: Not applicable.

Publication Information

Output type

Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Original language

English (US)

Pages from-to (Number of pages)

Pages 31-40 (10 pages)

Journal (Volume, Issue Number)

Journal of Hand Therapy (Volume 23, Issue 1)

Publication milestones

  • Published - 01/2010

Publication status

Published - 01/2010

ISSN

0894-1130

Publication IDs

  • Scopus: 75349090725
  • PubMed: 19944563

Publication metrics

Metrics

SciVal
citations
28
Fractional count
1
Fractional count
0.20
Fractional count
4
Fractional count
0.80
Fractional count
1
Fractional count
1
SciVal
FWCI
1.60
SciVal
Author count
5
SciVal
Paper percentile
82
Scopus
citations

PlumX, opens in new tab

Captures
57
Citation count
40