Measurement properties of performance-based instruments for assessing mental function during activity and participation in persons with stroke: A systematic review

References

• Institute NHLaB. What is stroke? https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/stroke. 2019 [cited 2019 Apr 30]. Available from: https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/stroke.
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. International classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Jokinen H, Melkas S, Ylikoski R, et al. Post-stroke cognitive impairment is common even after successful clinical recovery. Eur J Neurol. 2015;22:1288–1294. doi: 10.1111/ene.12743.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leśniak M, Bak T, Czepiel W, et al. Frequency and prognostic value of cognitive disorders in stroke patients. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2008;26:356–363. doi: 10.1159/000162262.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Rijsbergen MW, Mark RE, de Kort PL, et al. Subjective cognitive complaints after stroke: a systematic review. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2014;23:408–420. doi: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2013.05.003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cumming TB, Marshall RS, Lazar RM. Stroke, cognitive deficits, and rehabilitation: still an incomplete picture. Int J Stroke. 2013;8:38–45. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-4949.2012.00972.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poulin V, Korner-Bitensky N, Dawson DR. Stroke-specific executive function assessment: a literature review of performance-based tools. Aust Occup Ther J. 2013;60:3–19. doi: 10.1111/1440-1630.12024.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgess PW, Alderman N, Forbes C, et al. The case for the development and use of "ecologically valid" measures of executive function in experimental and clinical neuropsychology. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2006;12:194–209. doi: 10.1017/S1355617706060310.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lezak MD. The problem of assessing executive functions. Int J Psychol. 1982;17:281–297. doi: 10.1080/00207598208247445.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sansonetti D, Hoffmann T. Cognitive assessment across the continuum of care: the importance of occupational performance-based assessment for individuals post-stroke and traumatic brain injury. Aust Occup Ther J. 2013;60:334–342. doi: 10.1111/1440-1630.12069.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Árnadóttir G, Löfgren B, Fisher AG. Difference in impact of neurobehavioural dysfunction on activities of daily living performance between right and left hemispheric stroke. J Rehabil Med. 2010;42:903–907. doi: 10.2340/16501977-0621.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL, et al. Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist. Qual Life Res. 2012;21:651–657. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9960-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mokkink LA-O, Boers M, van der Vleuten CPM, et al. COSMIN Risk of Bias tool to assess the quality of studies on reliability or measurement error of outcome measurement instruments: a Delphi study. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020;20:293–305.
   Google Scholar
• Prinsen CA-O, Mokkink LA-O, Bouter LA-O, et al. COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures. Qual Life Res. 2018;27:1147–1157.
   Google Scholar
• Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ. 2015;350:g7647. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g7647.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kristensen LQ, van Tulder MW, Kristensen HA-O, et al. Measurement properties of performance-based instruments to assess mental function during activity and participation in persons who have survived a stroke: a systematic review protocol. Scand J Occup Ther. 2023;30:222–227.
   Google Scholar
• Muren MA, Kristensen LQ, Petersen AK, et al. Measurement properties of instruments to assess mental function during activity and participation in individuals surviving traumatic brain injury: a systematic review protocol. Scand J Occup Ther. 2020;27:163–167.
   Google Scholar
• Kristensen LQ, Muren MA, Petersen AK, et al. Measurement properties of performance-based instruments to assess mental function during activity and participation in traumatic brain injury: a systematic review measurement properties of instruments to assess mental function during activity and participation in individuals surviving traumatic brain injury: a systematic review protocol. Scand J Occup Ther. 2020;27:168–183.
   Google Scholar
• Terwee CB, Jansma EP, Riphagen II, et al. Development of a methodological PubMed search filter for finding studies on measurement properties of measurement instruments. Qual Life Res. 2009;18:1115–1123. doi: 10.1007/s11136-009-9528-5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, et al. The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63:737–745. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.02.006.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Terwee CB, Prinsen CAC, Chiarotto A, et al. COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: a Delphi study. Qual Life Res. 2018;27:1159–1170.
   Google Scholar
• NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS). CINAHL nursing guide, 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Mokkink L, Terwee C, de Vet H. Key concepts in clinical epidemiology: responsiveness, the longitudinal aspect of validity. J Clin Epidemiol. 2021;140:159–162.
   Google Scholar
• Azouvi P. Functional consequences and awareness of unilateral neglect: study of an evaluation scale. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 1996;6:133–150. 1996/04/01doi: 10.1080/713755501.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen P, Chen CC, Hreha K, et al. Kessler foundation neglect assessment process uniquely measures spatial neglect during activities of daily living. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;96:869–876.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2014.10.023.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolf TJ, Stift S, Connor LT, et al. Feasibility of using the EFPT to detect executive function deficits at the acute stage of stroke. Work. 2010;36:405–412.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nir-Hadad SY, Weiss PL, Waizman A, et al. A virtual shopping task for the assessment of executive functions: validity for people with stroke. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2017;27:808–833. doi: 10.1080/09602011.2015.1109523.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mokkink LA-O, de Vet HCW, Prinsen CAC, et al. COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist for systematic reviews of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures. Qual Life Res. 2018;27:1171–1179.
   Google Scholar
• Arnadottir G, Fisher AG, Lofgren B. Dimensionality of nonmotor neurobehavioral impairments when observed in the natural contexts of ADL task performance. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2009;23:579–586. doi: 10.1177/1545968308324223.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardarsdottir S, Kaplan S. Validity of the arnadottir OT-ADL neurobehavioral evaluation (A-ONE): performance in activities of daily living and neurobehavioral impairments of persons with left and right hemisphere damage. Am J Occup Ther. 2002;56:499–508. doi: 10.5014/ajot.56.5.499.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Medvedev ON, Turner-Stokes L, Ashford S, et al. Rasch analysis of the UK functional assessment measure in ­patients with complex disability after stroke. J Rehabil Med. 2018;50:428–428. doi: 10.2340/16501977-2324.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miki E, Yamane S, Yamaoka M, et al. Validity and reliability of the Japanese version of the FIM + FAM in patients with cerebrovascular accident. Scand J Occup Ther. 2016;23:398–404. doi: 10.3109/11038128.2015.1095236.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nayar M, Vanderstay R, Siegert RJ, et al. The UK functional assessment measure (UK FIM + FAM): psychometric evaluation in patients undergoing specialist rehabilitation following a stroke from the national UK clinical dataset. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0147288. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0147288.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ottiger B, Vanbellingen T, Gabriel C, et al. Validation of the new Lucerne ICF based multidisciplinary observation scale (LIMOS) for stroke patients. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0130925. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0130925.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vanbellingen T, Ottiger B, Pflugshaupt T, et al. The responsiveness of the Lucerne ICF-based multidisciplinary observation scale: a comparison with the functional independence measure and the barthel index. Front Neurol. 2016;7:152. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2016.00152.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamed R, Tariah HA, Malkawi S, et al. The arabic version of the Mayo-Portland adaptability inventory 4: a validation study. Int J Rehabil Res. 2012;35:243–247. doi: 10.1097/MRR.0b013e3283544c9f.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malec JF, Kean J, Altman IM, et al. Mayo-Portland adaptability inventory: comparing psychometrics in cerebrovascular accident to traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;93:2271–2275. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2012.06.013.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mysiw WJ, Beegan JG, Gatens PF. Prospective cognitive assessment of stroke patients before inpatient rehabilitation. The relationship of the neurobehavioral cognitive status examination to functional improvement. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1989;68:168–171. doi: 10.1097/00002060-198908000-00003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osmon DC, Smet IC, Winegarden B, et al. Neurobehavioral cognitive status examination: its use with unilateral stroke patients in a rehabilitation setting. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1992;73:414–418.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ku J, Lee JH, Han K, et al. Validity and reliability of cognitive assessment using virtual environment technology in patients with stroke. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;88:702–710. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0b013e3181aa427d.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartman-Maeir A, Harel H, Katz N. Kettle test—A brief measure of cognitive functional performance: reliability and validity in stroke rehabilitation. Am J Occup Ther. 2009;63:592–599. doi: 10.5014/ajot.63.5.592.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsuji T, Liu M, Sonoda S, et al. Newly developed short behavior scale for use in stroke outcome research. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1998;77:376–381. doi: 10.1097/00002060-199809000-00003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolf TJ, Morrison T, Matheson L. Initial development of a work-related assessment of dysexecutive syndrome: the complex task performance assessment. Work. 2008;31:221–228.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wolf TJ, Dahl A, Auen C, et al. The reliability and validity of the complex task performance assessment: a performance-based assessment of executive function. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2017;27:707–721. doi: 10.1080/09602011.2015.1037771.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baum CM, Connor LT, Morrison T, et al. Reliability, validity, and clinical utility of the executive function performance test: a measure of executive function in a sample of people with stroke. Am J Occup Ther. 2008;62:446–455. Jul-Augdoi: 10.5014/ajot.62.4.446.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cederfeldt M, Carlsson G, Dahlin–Ivanoff S, et al. Inter-rater reliability and face validity of the executive function performance test (EFPT). British J Occup Ther. 2015;78:563–569. doi: 10.1177/0308022615575744.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conti J, Brucki SMD. Executive function performance test: transcultural adaptation, evaluation of psychometric properties in Brazil. Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 2018;76:767–774. doi: 10.1590/0004-282X20180127.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hahn B, Baum C, Moore J, et al. Development of additional tasks for the executive function performance test. Am J Occup Ther. 2014;68:e241-6–e246. doi: 10.5014/ajot.2014.008565.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kim H, Lee YN, Jo EM, et al. Reliability and validity of culturally adapted executive function performance test for koreans with stroke. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2017;26:1033–1040. doi: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2016.12.013.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rand D, Lee Ben-Haim K, Malka R, et al. Development of internet-based tasks for the executive function performance test. Am J Occup Ther. 2018;72:7202205060p1–7202205060p7. doi: 10.5014/ajot.2018.023598.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carroll G, Fau-Radomski M, Radomski M, et al. Front desk duty multitasking test after mild stroke: preliminary reliability and validity. Can J Occup Ther. 2020;87:372–381.
   Google Scholar
• Dawson DR, Anderson ND, Burgess P, et al. Further development of the multiple errands test: standardized scoring, reliability, and ecological validity for the baycrest version. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;90:S41–S51. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2009.07.012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morrison MT, Giles GM, Ryan JD, et al. Multiple errands test-revised (MET-R): a performance-based measure of executive function in people with mild cerebrovascular accident. Am J Occup Ther. 2013;67:460–468. doi: 10.5014/ajot.2013.007880.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raspelli S, Pallavicini F, Carelli L, et al. Validation of a neuro virtual reality-based version of the multiple errands test for the assessment of executive functions. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2011;167:92–97.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rand D, Basha-Abu Rukan S, Weiss PL, et al. Validation of the virtual MET as an assessment tool for executive functions. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2009;19:583–602. doi: 10.1080/09602010802469074.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burns SP, Dawson DR, Perea JD, et al. Development, reliability, and validity of the multiple errands test home version (MET-Home) in adults with stroke. Am J Occup Ther. 2019;73:7303205030p1-7303205030p10.
   Google Scholar
• Josman N, Kizony R, Hof E, et al. Using the virtual action planning-supermarket for evaluating executive functions in people with stroke. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2014;23:879–887. doi: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2013.07.013.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halligan PW, Cockburn J, Wilson BA. The behavioural assessment of visual neglect. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 1991;1:5–32. 1991/01/01doi: 10.1080/09602019108401377.
   Google Scholar
• Hartman-Maeir A, Katz N. Validity of the behavioral inattention test (BIT): relationships with functional tasks. Am J Occup Ther. 1995;49:507–516. doi: 10.5014/ajot.49.6.507.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sánchez-Cabeza Á, Huertas-Hoyas E, Máximo-Bocanegra N, et al. Spanish transcultural adaptation and validity of the behavioral inattention test. Occup Ther Int. 2017;2017:1423647. doi: 10.1155/2017/1423647.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wilson B, Fau-Cockburn J, Cockburn J, et al. Development of a behavioral test of visuospatial neglect. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1987;68:98–102.
   Google Scholar
• Azouvi P, Samuel C, Fau-Louis-Dreyfus A, et al. Sensitivity of clinical and behavioural tests of spatial neglect after right hemisphere stroke.J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2002;73:160–166.
   Google Scholar
• Azouvi P, Olivier S, Fau-de Montety G, et al. Behavioral assessment of unilateral neglect: study of the psychometric properties of the Catherine Bergego Scale. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;84:51–7.
   Google Scholar
• Goedert KM, Chen P, Botticello A, et al. Psychometric evaluation of neglect assessment reveals motor-exploratory predictor of functional disability in acute-stage spatial neglect. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;93:137–142. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.06.036.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luukkainen-Markkula R, Tarkka IM, Pitkanen K, et al. Comparison of the behavioural inattention test and the catherine bergego scale in assessment of hemispatial neglect. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2011;21:103–116. doi: 10.1080/09602011.2010.531619.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marques CLS, de Souza JT, Gonçalves MG, et al. Validation of the Catherine Bergego Scale in patients with unilateral spatial neglect after stroke. Dement Neuropsychol. 2019;13:82–88.
   Google Scholar
• Nishida DA-O, Mizuno KA-OX, Tahara MA-O, et al. Behavioral assessment of unilateral spatial neglect with the catherine bergego scale (CBS) Using the Kessler Foundation Neglect Assessment Process (KF-NAP) in patients with subacute Stroke during rehabilitation in Japan. Behav Neurol. 2021;2021:8825192.
   Google Scholar
• Pitteri M, Chen P, Passarini L, et al. Conventional and functional assessment of spatial neglect: clinical practice suggestions. Neuropsychology. 2018;32:835–842. doi: 10.1037/neu0000469.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eschenbeck P, Vossel S, Weiss PH, et al. Testing for neglect in right-hemispheric stroke patients using a new assessment battery based upon standardized activities of daily living (ADL). Neuropsychologia. 2010;48:3488–3496. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.07.034.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qiang W, Sonoda S, Suzuki M, et al. Reliability and validity of a wheelchair collision test for screening behavioral assessment of unilateral neglect after stroke. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;84:161–166. doi: 10.1097/01.phm.0000154902.79990.12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hesketh A, Long A, Patchick E, et al. The reliability of rating conversation as ameasure of functional communication following stroke. Aphasiology. 2008;22:970–984. doi: 10.1080/02687030801952709.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hilari K, Galante L, Huck A, et al. Cultural adaptation and psychometric testing of The scenario test UK for people with aphasia [article]. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2018;53:748–760. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.12379.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Meulen I, van de Sandt-Koenderman Wm Fau-Duivenvoorden HJ, Duivenvoorden Hj Fau-Ribbers GM, et al. Measuring verbal and non-verbal communication in aphasia: reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change of the Scenario Test. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2010;45:424–35.
   Google Scholar
• Clark AJ, Anderson ND, Nalder E, et al. Reliability and construct validity of a revised Baycrest Multiple Errands Test. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2017;27:667–684
   Google Scholar
• Almubark BM, Cattani A, Floccia C. Translation, cultural adaptation and validation of the cognistat for its use in arabic speaking population with ­acquired brain injury. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2019;55:595–604. doi: 10.23736/S1973-9087.18.05530-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webb SS, Jespersen A, Chiu EG, et al. The oxford digital multiple errands test (OxMET): validation of a simplified computer tablet based multiple errands test. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2022;32:1007–1032.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goverover Y, Kalmar J, Fau-Gaudino-Goering E, et al. The relation between subjective and objective measures of everyday life activities in persons with multiple sclerosis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86:2303–2308
   Google Scholar
• Katz N, Tadmor I, Felzen B, et al. Validity of the executive function performance test in individuals with schizophrenia. OTJR. 2007;27:44–51. 2007/03/01doi: 10.1177/153944920702700202.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar