Nombre: ELIZANGELA KUSTER
Fecha de publicación: 20/03/2025
Junta de examinadores:
Nombre |
Papel |
|---|---|
| LAURA YUKIKO UEHARA | Examinador Externo |
| MARIANA MIDORI SIME | Examinador Interno |
Sumario: Decreased mobility after stroke negatively impacts social participation and quality
of life [1-3]. The Life Space Assessment is an easy-to-administer and free
questionnaire that measures mobility inside and outside the home taking into
account both frequency and level of assistance required over the past month
[4,5]. However, its measurement properties are unclear for measuring mobility
after stroke, which preclude the use of the questionnaire for clinical and research
purposes.
One study [6] demonstrated very-high test-retest reliability (ICC 0.98; 95% CI
0.96 to 0.99) and inter-rater reliability (ICC 0.94; 95% CI 0.87 to 0.97) in 30
individuals after stroke and a second study [7] demonstrated a moderate-to-high
correlation between remote and in-person administrations (95% CI 0.62 to 0.94)
in 19 individuals. The sample size of both studies is not in accordance with the
Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement
Instruments (COSMIN) [8], and only individuals in the chronic phase were
examined.
In the acute phase, mobility tends to be worse, in comparison with the chronic
phase [9]. On the other hand, changes in the acute phase tend to be more
pronounced [10]. As measurement properties are population-dependent [11], a
study that includes people in the acute phase after stroke is warranted [12]. The
current study is, therefore, innovative by including a proper sample size
comprised of individuals in the acute phase after stroke and by validating the
27
questionnaire’s remote application. The purpose was to investigate the
measurement properties of the Life Space Assessment early after stroke. The
specific research questions were:
1. Has the Life Space Assessment appropriate measurement properties (i.e.,
test-retest reliability and measurement error) for measuring mobility in the acute
phase after stroke? Which is the test’s minimal detectable change?
2. Does the telephone administration of the questionnaire have comparable
results to the in-person administration, and appropriate inter-rater reliability?
