ArticleJournal of occupational rehabilitation2018
Functional Capacity Evaluation in Upper Limb Reduction Deficiency and Amputation: Development and Pilot Testing.
Article in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Outcomes and Preferences for Decision-Making for Upper Limb Prosthetic Care: The Patient Journey: A Scoping Literature Review.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2025Review
- Musculoskeletal complaints, physical work demands, and functional capacity in individuals with a brachial plexus injury: An exploratory study.Work (Reading, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Functional capacity of individuals with brachial plexus injury.Work (Reading, Mass.) · 2023Article
- Linking the Spinal Function Sort and Functional Capacity Evaluation Tests to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Core Set of Vocational Rehabilitation.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2021Article
- Repeatability and Safety of the Functional Capacity Evaluation-One-Handed for Individuals with Upper Limb Reduction Deficiency and Amputation.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose To develop and pilot test a functional capacity evaluation (FCE) for individuals with upper limb absence (ULA) due to reduction deficiency or amputation, and to examine the relationship between FCE results and presence of musculoskeletal complaints (MSC). Method Five tests (overhead lifting, overhead working, repetitive reaching, fingertip dexterity, and handgrip strength) were selected and adapted if necessary. The newly developed FCE, called FCE-One-Handed (FCE-OH), was pilot tested in 20 adults individuals with ULA, and 20 matched controls. MSC were assessed via a questionnaire. Results Adaptations were considered necessary for all tests, except the handgrip strength test. The repetitive overhead lifting test of the non-affected limb was added. On the overhead lifting test, individuals with above-elbow ULA (ten males), performed similar to controls using one hand. When lifting bimanually using the prosthesis, a trend for lower lifting capacity of individuals with below-elbow ULA (seven males, three females) was observed compared to controls. On the overhead working test, individuals with above-elbow ULA performed worse compared to controls. Other tests showed no significant differences between groups. Relationships between FCE results and presence of MSC were non-significant. Conclusion The FCE-OH can be used to test functional capacity of one-handed individuals. Individuals with ULA generally showed similar functional capacity as two-handed individuals. FCE results were not related to MSC. It was discussed that a higher physical load on the non-affected limb might reflect a relative deficit of functional capacity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.