Remotely Assessing Motor Function and Activity of the Upper Extremity After Stroke: A Systematic Review of Validity and Clinical Utility of Tele-Assessments.
Lena Sauerzopf, Andreas R Luft, Anna Baldissera and 3 others
PMID 38839104WHAT IT FOUND
No remote upper-limb assessment for stroke met the threshold for clinical utility.
While some tools showed good reliability or validity, all required special equipment or training, and none scored high enough to be recommended for routine use.
Key findings
01None of the 11 identified tele-assessments met the criteria for sufficient clinical utility.
02Seven tele-assessments had at least one measurement property classified as “sufficient” in a study with at least adequate methodological quality.
03All included tele-assessments require special equipment and/or training, which limits their implementation.
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
The included studies were highly heterogeneous, making it difficult to compare assessments or draw broad conclusions. Many studies had incomplete reporting, forcing the reviewers to estimate some clinical utility values. The clinical utility scale used British Pounds for cost calculations, which may not generalize to other regions. The review excluded 32 studies of assessments in early development, so newer or emerging tools were not evaluated. Sample sizes in the included studies were small (4 to 56 participants).
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the high reliability or validity scores of specific tools (like Tele-FMA) as evidence that they are ready for clinical use. The review explicitly states that none of the assessments met the criteria for sufficient clinical utility due to barriers like cost, equipment needs, and training requirements.