Children's amputee mobility predictor-Assessing the functional capability of children with leg length discrepancy.
Sharon Eylon, Nurit Stern, Itai Schurr and 3 others
PMID 39665215WHAT IT FOUND
The Children's Amputee Mobility Predictor reliably scores functional capability in children with leg length discrepancies.
It takes about 30 minutes, needs little equipment, and includes child-specific tasks like kicking and floor transitions. Parents and experts rated these tasks as relevant to daily life.
Key findings
01The measure showed excellent stability when the same therapist scored children twice two weeks apart, and excellent agreement when different therapists scored video recordings of the same children.
02Parents rated the included tasks as relevant or completely relevant to their children's daily activities, supporting the measure's social validity.
03The assessment takes about 30 minutes, requires minimal equipment, and uses a simple scoring system suitable for clinical settings.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study relied on content and social validity, which are lower levels of evidence than construct or criterion validity. The sample size was small (30 participants), and only 17 completed the two-week retest, limiting the generalizability of the reliability findings. Inter-rater reliability was tested by scoring video recordings, not by different therapists administering the test in person, so administration errors were not captured. Some tasks were not age-appropriate for the youngest children, requiring them to be marked as 'not tested' and excluded from scoring.
Declared interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest. The work was supported by the Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume this measure is validated for diagnosing specific impairments or comparing groups. The study only established reliability and basic validity. It does not yet show that this tool correlates with other gold-standard measures or predicts long-term outcomes.