Comparison of Self-Report Versus Sensor-Based Methods for Measuring the Amount of Upper Limb Activity Outside the Clinic.
Kimberly J Waddell, Catherine E Lang
PMID 29408483WHAT IT FOUND
Self-reported and sensor-measured upper limb use correlate moderately but disagree frequently.
Only five participants were consistently accurate. Therapists should not assume a patient's report of arm use matches objective data, nor use the two measures interchangeably.
Key findings
01Self-reported and sensor-derived upper limb performance were moderately associated at baseline (r=0.31) and post-intervention (r=0.52), but showed high variability and inconsistency.
02Only 5 participants were classified as consistently accurate reporters across both time points, while 52% switched reporting categories.
03No differences in age, cognitive function, depression, motor capacity, or limb dominance explained the reporting inconsistencies.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
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
Modest sample size (64 participants) limits the ability to detect subtle differences between reporting categories. The analysis could not formally test for statistical differences across the accurate, under-reporting, and over-reporting groups due to small, imbalanced numbers. The study was a secondary analysis, so it was not designed specifically to test the relationship between these two measurement methods.
Declared interests
The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume that a moderate correlation between self-report and sensor data means the measures are interchangeable for individual patients. The high rate of category switching and low number of consistently accurate reporters means a patient's self-assessment is often unreliable for tracking specific changes in daily arm use.