• Title/Summary/Keyword: AAUT

Search Result 2, Processing Time 0.02 seconds

Studies on Motor Activity Log-28 and Actual Amount of Use Test, Actual Amount of Use Test Inter-rater Reliability in Healthy Individuals: Age Dependence and Handedness (연령과 손잡이에 따른 정상인들의 Motor Activity Log-28과 Actual Amount of Use Test 연구 및 Actual Amount of Use Test의 평가자간 신뢰도연구)

  • Kim, Kyeong-hyeon;Shin, Yu-mi;Lim, Mi-yu;Jung, Yu-chang;Oh, Ji-eun;Kim, Su-jin
    • Physical Therapy Korea
    • /
    • v.26 no.2
    • /
    • pp.24-33
    • /
    • 2019
  • Background: Spontaneous use of the upper extremities on the affected side of patients with stroke is a meaningful indicator of recovery and may vary by the age or dominant hand of patients. No prior study has reported changes in actual amount of use test (AAUT) and motor activity log (MAL)-28 according to age and handedness in healthy adults, and AAUT inter-rater reliability for assessment of healthy adults. Objects: This study aimed to (1) research the differences in AAUT and MAL-28 according to age and handedness in healthy adults, and (2) determine the inter-rater reliability of the AAUT. Methods: Seventy healthy adults participated in this study. The MAL-28 was assessed by dividing 61 subjects into young right-handed ($n_1=20$), young left-handed ($n_2=21$), and older right-handed ($n_3=20$) groups. The AAUT was assessed by dividing 63 subjects into young right-handed ($n_1=25$), young left-handed ($n_2=18$), and older right-handed ($n_3=20$) groups. Student's t-test and the Wilcoxon signedrank test were used for statistical analysis. Results: The Amount of Use (AOU) scale values for each group showed no significant differences between age groups and handedness groups in the MAL-28 (p>.05). The AAUT AOU scale value showed significant differences regarding dominant handedness in the AAUT (p<.05), but no significant differences according to age (p>.05). (2) Inter-rater reliability of the AAUT was excellent, except few items (item 9, 11, and 12). Conclusion: Although both the MAL-28 and the AAUT measured how much participants used their dominant arms in healthy subjects, the AAUT only showed significantly higher dominant arm use in left hander than the right hander. In addition, the inter-rater reliability of the AAUT was excellent. Current results can be utilized as a basic information when clinicians develop rehabilitation strategies, and AAUT was shown to be a reliable evaluation tool for measurement of upper extremity use in Korean adults, based on the reliability demonstrated by this study.

The study of paralytic side functional recovery on hemiplegia (편마비 환자의 환측 기능회복을 위한 연구)

  • Kim, Chi-Hyok;Cho, Young-Ha;Kim, Yong-Kwon
    • Journal of Korean Physical Therapy Science
    • /
    • v.9 no.2
    • /
    • pp.7-16
    • /
    • 2002
  • This study was conducted to assess the changes in the functional levels of affected upper extremities after treating hemiplegic patients by applying constraint-induced movement therapy(CIMT). The subjects were selected from 20 hemiplegic patients with scores of 25 or more in Mini Mental State Examination(MMSE-k), transferred to the departments of physical therapy in two university hospitals in Busan from December, 2001 to march, 2002, and were divided into two groups. Eleven subjects with fixing unaffected arms by CIMT were assigned to the experimental patient group and the other 9 patients to control group without fixing unaffected arms. The function of upper arms for both groups were evaluated by using Actual Amount of Use Test(AAUT) and Motor Active Log(MAL) before and after physical therapy. The malts were as follows: The recovery rates of upper extremity by AOU(Activity of Use) and QOM(Quality of Movement) were 23.9% and 27.3% for CIMT treated group, and by 8.3% and 4.6% for the control group on the average, respectively, in AAUT after physical therapy, showing statistically significant differences between two groups. And in MAL, the average recovery rates were 27.3% by AOU and 22.6% by QOM for CIMT treated group while 3.1% by both AOU and QOM for the control group, and were significantly different between twogroups.

  • PDF