Test-retest reliability and practice effects of shape trail test in stroke patients.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2025-03-13 DOI:10.1080/10749357.2025.2457282
Xiuzhen Liu, Ye Zhang, Fang Li, Lin Liu, Jubao Du, Wei Qun Song
{"title":"Test-retest reliability and practice effects of shape trail test in stroke patients.","authors":"Xiuzhen Liu, Ye Zhang, Fang Li, Lin Liu, Jubao Du, Wei Qun Song","doi":"10.1080/10749357.2025.2457282","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Executive dysfunction after stroke greatly affects stroke prognosis, so clinicians need to urgently focus on screening for it. This study aims to offer valuable data for research on post-stroke executive dysfunction by evaluating the test-retest reliability of the Shape Trail Test (STT) and the influence of the practice effect on scores among stroke patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 75 subacute stroke patients were included in the study. Based on the cutoff value for mild cognitive impairment(MCI) in the Chinese version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment-Basic, the patients were divided into an MCI group and a cognitively normal (CN) group. The patients were asked to complete the Shape Trail Test (STT) on two different occasions within three days. The time taken to complete Part A and Part B were denoted as STT-A and STT-B respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficient(ICC), Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients were used as metrics, and a paired t test was employed to evaluate the practice effect.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>(1) The actual number of patients who completed the research was 71. The STT showed great test-retest reliability in stroke patients (ICC, STTA: 0.927 VS STTB: 0.881; Spearman, STTA: 0.824 VS STTB: 0.713, <i>n</i> = 71). The test-retest reliability of STTA is higher than that of STTB (ICC, STTA = 0.927>STTB = 0.881; Spearman, STTA = 0.824>STTB = 0.713; <i>n</i> = 71). The reliability of the MCI group was higher than that of the CN group (ICC, STTA:MCI = 0.94>CN = 0.71; STTB:MCI = 0.87>CN = 0.64). (2) Subgroup analysis revealed distinct practice effects between the MCI and CN groups. The MCI group showed no practice effect, while the CN group had a partial one. In the CN group, practice did not significantly impact STT-A scores (<i>p</i> = 0.782), but did affect STT-B scores (<i>p</i> = 0.035). In contrast, in the MCI group, no significant practice effects on the STT were observed (<i>p</i> > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>STT's test-retest reliability was moderate to high in stroke patients and varied by cognitive function. Subgroup analyses should precede assessments of STT's test-retest reliability in stroke patients. Patients with cognitive dysfunction showed no significant practice effects. Given that this research is carried out specifically within the Chinese context, extreme care should be taken in extending the study's findings to other populations.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01322607.</p>","PeriodicalId":23164,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10749357.2025.2457282","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Executive dysfunction after stroke greatly affects stroke prognosis, so clinicians need to urgently focus on screening for it. This study aims to offer valuable data for research on post-stroke executive dysfunction by evaluating the test-retest reliability of the Shape Trail Test (STT) and the influence of the practice effect on scores among stroke patients.

Methods: A total of 75 subacute stroke patients were included in the study. Based on the cutoff value for mild cognitive impairment(MCI) in the Chinese version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment-Basic, the patients were divided into an MCI group and a cognitively normal (CN) group. The patients were asked to complete the Shape Trail Test (STT) on two different occasions within three days. The time taken to complete Part A and Part B were denoted as STT-A and STT-B respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficient(ICC), Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients were used as metrics, and a paired t test was employed to evaluate the practice effect.

Results: (1) The actual number of patients who completed the research was 71. The STT showed great test-retest reliability in stroke patients (ICC, STTA: 0.927 VS STTB: 0.881; Spearman, STTA: 0.824 VS STTB: 0.713, n = 71). The test-retest reliability of STTA is higher than that of STTB (ICC, STTA = 0.927>STTB = 0.881; Spearman, STTA = 0.824>STTB = 0.713; n = 71). The reliability of the MCI group was higher than that of the CN group (ICC, STTA:MCI = 0.94>CN = 0.71; STTB:MCI = 0.87>CN = 0.64). (2) Subgroup analysis revealed distinct practice effects between the MCI and CN groups. The MCI group showed no practice effect, while the CN group had a partial one. In the CN group, practice did not significantly impact STT-A scores (p = 0.782), but did affect STT-B scores (p = 0.035). In contrast, in the MCI group, no significant practice effects on the STT were observed (p > 0.05).

Conclusions: STT's test-retest reliability was moderate to high in stroke patients and varied by cognitive function. Subgroup analyses should precede assessments of STT's test-retest reliability in stroke patients. Patients with cognitive dysfunction showed no significant practice effects. Given that this research is carried out specifically within the Chinese context, extreme care should be taken in extending the study's findings to other populations.

Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01322607.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation
Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation 医学-康复医学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
4.50%
发文量
57
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation is the leading journal devoted to the study and dissemination of interdisciplinary, evidence-based, clinical information related to stroke rehabilitation. The journal’s scope covers physical medicine and rehabilitation, neurology, neurorehabilitation, neural engineering and therapeutics, neuropsychology and cognition, optimization of the rehabilitation system, robotics and biomechanics, pain management, nursing, physical therapy, cardiopulmonary fitness, mobility, occupational therapy, speech pathology and communication. There is a particular focus on stroke recovery, improving rehabilitation outcomes, quality of life, activities of daily living, motor control, family and care givers, and community issues. The journal reviews and reports clinical practices, clinical trials, state-of-the-art concepts, and new developments in stroke research and patient care. Both primary research papers, reviews of existing literature, and invited editorials, are included. Sharply-focused, single-issue topics, and the latest in clinical research, provide in-depth knowledge.
期刊最新文献
Test-retest reliability and practice effects of shape trail test in stroke patients. Effectiveness of technology-based stroke interventions to improve upper limb functioning in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Comparing the reliability of physical activity questionnaires in community-dwelling adults with stroke. Comparison of psychometric properties of the dual-task timed up-and-go test (cognitive) and the 3-m walk backward test in community-dwelling stroke patients. Measurement properties of activity monitoring for a rehabilitation (AMoR) platform in post-stroke individuals in a simulated home environment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1