Correlation between kinetic and kinematic measures, clinical tests and subjective self-evaluation questionnaires of the affected upper limb in people after stroke

IntroductionAssessment of stroke recovery should include multiple sources of information in order to obtain a complete understanding of the individual’s rehabilitation progress. Self-evaluation questionnaires’ scores do not always correspond to the scores of commonly used clinical evaluation tools. The purpose of this study was to assess the relationship between self-evaluation questionnaires, clinical tests, and kinematic and kinetic analyses of the affected upper limb after stroke, and to determine the correlation between these measures and self-reported general function 2–4 years after the stroke.MethodsTwenty-six subjects recovering from stroke were included in the study. Spearman’s correlation coefficient was used to measure the correlation between Stroke Impact Scale (SIS), Motor activity Log (MAL), Fugl-Meyer Assessment (FMA) and Action Reach Arm Test (ARAT) scores, and kinematic and kinetic analyses. A logistic regression was used to assess the extent to which these measures may predict the participants’ functional self-reported status 2–4 years post stroke.ResultsSections regarding hand function, hand force and general ADL of the self-evaluation questionnaires correlated with kinematic variables. However, only questionnaires that focus on hand function correlated with clinical tests. Mean and maximal hand velocity had the strongest correlations with self-evaluation questionnaires and with the clinical tests, more than other kinematic variables. Self-evaluation questionnaires and clinical tests were found to be correlated with hand kinetic metrics force-to-time ratio and number of force peaks. SIS hand force domain, mean velocity and maximal velocity predicted self-reported general function 2–4 years after the stroke.ConclusionSelf-evaluation questionnaires should be considered for wider use in the clinical evaluation of a patient’s stroke recovery, since they add important information on the individual’s functional status, which is not reflected in the clinical tests