• Lucelle A van de Ven-Stevens, Marten Munneke, Caroline B Terwee, Paul H Spauwen, and Harmen van der Linde.
• Department of Occupational Therapy and Research Centre for Allied Health Care, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. L.vandeVen-Stevens@pmd.umcn.nl
• Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009 Jan 1;90(1):151-69.

ObjectiveTo perform a systematic review of the literature to assess the clinimetric properties of instruments measuring limitations of activity.Data SourcesThe Medline, Cochrane Library, Picarta, Occupational Therapy-seeker, and CINAHL databases were searched for English or Dutch language articles published between 2001 and 2006.Study SelectionTwo reviewers independently reviewed the identified publications for eligibility (based on the title and abstract), methodologic criteria, and clinimetric properties. To evaluate the available information of the clinimetric properties, the quality criteria for instrument properties were used.Data ExtractionAll the clinimetric properties of the 23 instruments were described based on the publications that were included.Data SynthesisIn total, 103 publications were retrieved, 79 of which were eligible for inclusion. Of these, 54 met the methodologic quality criteria. Twenty-three instruments were reviewed, divided into (1) pegboard tests measuring fine hand use only; (2) instruments measuring fine hand use only, by picking up, manipulating, and placing different objects; (3) instruments measuring single tasks (and fine hand use) by scoring task performance; and (4) questionnaires. The reliability, validity, and responsiveness of only 5 instruments were adequately described in the literature; the description of the clinimetric properties of the other instruments was inadequate.ConclusionsNone of the instruments had a positive rating for all the clinimetric properties.

9 keywords...

hide…