PTOtherJournal of physical therapy science2018

Reliability analysis of the Korean version of the trunk control measurement scale in cerebral palsy.

Ju-Young Heo, Hwa-Kyung Shin

PMID 29410555

WHAT IT FOUND

In 15 children with cerebral palsy, the Korean trunk control scale gave consistent scores on repeat testing and across four video raters, but some arm and trunk rotation items were less consistent.

Key findings

01When the same children were tested again after 7 days, scores were highly consistent across static sitting, dynamic sitting, and dynamic reaching.

02When four therapists scored the videos, the reported inter-rater values were 0.98 for static sitting balance, 0.95 for dynamic sitting balance, and 0.91 for dynamic reaching.

03Some individual items were less consistent: lifting both arms forward and reaching to a target were reported within 0.52 to 0.57, and one lower trunk rotation item was scored 0 by all children.

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.

Already have one?

What it does not show

Only 15 children were tested, so the result cannot be generalized to all children with cerebral palsy. The children had spastic cerebral palsy, so the scale was not tested across other types of cerebral palsy. Some children were younger than 8 years and were still developing postural control, which may have affected the scores. Several items were less consistent, especially lifting both arms forward, reaching to a target, and lower trunk rotation. The study tested a translated measurement scale, not a treatment, so it does not show that trunk control therapy works.

The easy way to misread this

Do not conclude that the Korean trunk control scale is proven for all children with cerebral palsy. It was tested in 15 children with spastic cerebral palsy, and some dynamic reaching and rotation items were not consistently scored.

Read it on PubMed →