Search

The article presents information on applied research on heart rate and physical activities of people with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities (PIMD). Topics discussed include, improvement of mental and physical health through physical activity, estimation of the intellectual capacity of PIMDs, and diffuse brain damage and neuromotor dysfunctions in such people.

To determine the reliability and concurrent validity of a visual analogue scale (VAS) for disability as a single-item instrument measuring disability in chronic pain patients was the objective of the study. For the reliability study a test-retest design and for the validity study a cross-sectional design was used. A general rehabilitation centre and a university rehabilitation centre was the setting for the study. The study population consisted of patients over 18 years of age, suffering from chronic musculoskeletal pain; 52 patients in the reliability study, 344 patients in the validity study. Main outcome measures were as follows. Reliability study: Spearman's correlation coefficients (rho values) of the test and retest data of the VAS for disability; validity study: rho values of the VAS disability scores with the scores on four domains of the Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) and VAS pain scores, and with Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire scores in chronic low back pain patients. Results were as follows: in the reliability study rho values varied from 0.60 to 0.77; and in the validity study rho values of VAS disability scores with SF-36 domain scores varied from 0.16 to 0.51, with Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire scores from 0.38 to 0.43 and with VAS pain scores from 0.76 to 0.84. The conclusion of the study was that the reliability of the VAS for disability is moderate to good. Because of a weak correlation with other disability instruments and a strong correlation with the VAS for pain, however, its validity is questionable.

The aim of this study was to determine the reliability of the Life Satisfaction Questionnaire, Dutch version (LSQ-DV), to assess chronic pain patients. The study was designed as test-retest. The setting was the general rehabilitation centre. There were 51 patients over 18 years of age, suffering from chronic nonmalignant musculoskeletal pain. The main outcome measures were weighted kappa of test and retest data on the nine questions of the LSQ-DV, and Spearman correlation coefficient (rho) of the test and retest data on the mean LSQ score. The results were as follows: weighted kappa varied from 0.34 to 0.82: eight of the nine weighted kappa values were moderate to almost perfect whereas one ('family life') was low. The rho value of the mean score was 0.74. The conclusion was that the reliability of the LSQ-DV in patients with chronic nonmalignant pain treated in a rehabilitation setting proved moderate to good for most domains, though low for the 'family life' domain. We recommend using the LSQ-DV in clinical practice and research, although the 'family life' score has to be interpreted with caution.

Background and Purpose: There is little agreement on how to assess outcome in acute stroke trials. Cutoff scores for the Barthel Index (BI) and modified Rankin Scale (mRS) are frequently arbitrarily chosen to dichotomize favorable and unfavorable outcome. We investigated sensitivity and specificity of BI cutoff scores in relation to the mRS to obtain the optimal corresponding BI and mRS scores., Methods: BI and mRS scores were collected from 1034 ischemic stroke patients. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for BI cutoff scores from 45 to 100 in mRS score 1, 2, and 3 and were plotted in receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves., Results: The cutoff scores for the BI with the highest sum of sensitivity and specificity were 95 (sensitivity 85.6%; specificity 91.7%), 90 (sensitivity 90.7%; specificity 88.1%), and 75 (sensitivity 95.7%; specificity, 88.5%) for, respectively, mRS 1, 2, and 3. The area under the ROC curve was 0.933 in mRS 1, 0.960 in mRS 2, and 0.979 in mRS 3., Conclusions: The optimal cutoff scores for the BI were 95 for mRS 1, 90 for mRS 2, and 75 for mRS 3. For future acute stroke trials that assess stroke outcome with the BI and mRS, we recommend the use of these BI cutoff score(s) with the corresponding mRS cutoff score(s), to ensure the use of consistent and uniform end points.

Background: There are no reports in the literature about patients with painfully restricted temporomandibular joints concerning the reliability of unidimensional and multidimensional pain scales on the basis of a generalizability and decision study. Generalizability and decision studies are designed to aid in reasoned decision-making and therefore are complementary to classic psychometric analyses, in which correlation coefficients express the reliability of a measurement design. The smallest detectable difference as an outcome of the decision study is the smallest statistically significant change that can be detected., Patients: Twenty-five consecutive patients (5 males and 20 females) with painfully restricted mandibular function participated in the current study., Design: Repeated measurements of three levels of unidimensional experienced pain (average, minimal, and maximal pain before the week of assessment; n = 200) and the multidimensional pain rating index of the MPQ (n = 100) were used. The measurement sessions were supervised by two observers on two separate measurement days, 1 week apart, with each measurement repeated twice., Results: Inconsistency in measurement results analyzed in terms of absolute error variance (i.e., the measurement facets plus all the interactions) represented at least 24% of total variance. The smallest detectable difference of visual analog scales varied from 43 to 15 mm, depending on the amount of repetitions, whereas for the pain rating index it varied from 22.7 to 14.4 units., Conclusions: For statistically and clinically successful treatment of patients with painfully restricted temporomandibular joints, clinicians must overcome at least the smallest detectable difference and 38% of the initial average pain level.