Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31279331›Full record

Trial reportBMC musculoskeletal disorders2019

Inter-rater reliability, sensitivity to change and responsiveness of the orthopaedic Wolf-Motor-Function-Test as functional capacity measure before and after rehabilitation in patients with proximal humeral fractures.

Corinna Nerz, Lars Schwickert, Sabine Schölch, Katharina Gordt, Philip-Christian Nolte, Inga Kröger, Peter Augat, Clemens Becker

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialValidation Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03100201 (Robotic-assisted Training After Upper Arm Fracture - a Multicentre, Controlled and Randomized Intervention Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03100201 nacompletednot on this map

Robotic-assisted Training After Upper Arm Fracture - a Multicentre, Controlled and Randomized Intervention Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorRobert Bosch Gesellschaft für Medizinische Forschung mbH (RBMF)Ran2016 to 2019Enrolled48ConditionsShoulder InjuryArmsIntervention Armeo®Spring, Control Group
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Corinna NerzDepartment for Clinical Gerontology, Robert-Bosch-Hospital, Auerbachstr. 110, 70376, Stuttgart, Germany. corinna.nerz@rbk.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5160-796X
Lars SchwickertDepartment for Clinical Gerontology, Robert-Bosch-Hospital, Auerbachstr. 110, 70376, Stuttgart, Germany.
Sabine SchölchDepartment for Clinical Gerontology, Robert-Bosch-Hospital, Auerbachstr. 110, 70376, Stuttgart, Germany.
Katharina GordtNetwork Aging Research (NAR), Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Philip-Christian NolteDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, BG Trauma Centre Ludwigshafen, Ludwigshafen, Germany.
Inga KrögerInstitute for Biomechanics, BG Unfallklinik Murnau, Murnau, Germany.
Peter AugatInstitute for Biomechanics, BG Unfallklinik Murnau, Murnau, Germany.
Clemens BeckerDepartment for Clinical Gerontology, Robert-Bosch-Hospital, Auerbachstr. 110, 70376, Stuttgart, Germany.

Funding

Deutsche Gesetzliche Unfallversicherung 412.02-FR-0233
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe incidence of proximal humeral fractures (PHF) increased by more than 30% over the last decade, which is accompanied by an increased number of operations. However, the evidence on operative vs. non-operative treatment and post-operative treatments is limited and mostly based on expert opinion. It is mandatory to objectively assess functional capacity to compare different treatments. Clinical tools should be valid, reliable and sensitive to change assessing functional capacity after PHFs. This study aimed to analyse inter-rater reliability of the videotaped Wolf-Motor-Function-Test-Orthopaedic (WMFT-O) and the association between the clinical WMFT-O and the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and to determine the sensitivity to change of the WMFT-O and the DASH to measure functional capacity before and after rehabilitation in PHF patients.

methodsFifty-six patients (61.7 ± 14.7 years) after surgical treatment of PHF were assessed using the WMFT-O at two different time points. To determine inter-rater reliability, the videotaped WMFT-O was evaluated through three blinded raters. Inter-rater agreement was determined by Fleiss' Kappa statistics. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to assess the association between the clinical WMFT-O and the video rating as well as the DASH. Sensitivity to change and responsiveness were analysed for the WMFT-O and the DASH in a subsample of forty patients (53.8 ± 1.4 years) who were assessed before and after a three week robotic-assisted training intervention.

resultsInter-rater agreement was indicated by Fleiss' Kappa values ranging from 0.33-0.66 for functional capacity and from 0.27-0.54 for quality of movement. The correlation between the clinical WMFT-O and the video rating was higher than 0.77. The correlation between the clinical WMFT-O and the DASH was weak. Sensitivity to change was high for the WMFT-O and the DASH and responsiveness was given. In comparison to the DASH, the sensitivity to change of the WMFT-O was higher.

conclusionThe overall results indicate that the WMFT-O is a reliable, sensitive and responsive instrument to measure more objectively functional change over time in rehabilitation after PHF. Furthermore, it has been shown that video assessment is eligible for studies to ensure a full blinding of raters.

trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov, NCT03100201 . Registered on 28 March 2017. The trial was retrospectively registered.

Indexed as

Disability EvaluationAgedArmExercise TherapyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOrthopedicsRange of Motion, ArticularReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesShoulder FracturesShoulder JointSurveys and QuestionnairesTreatment OutcomeOrthopaedic assessmentProximal humeral fractureReliabilityResponsivenessSensitivity to changeShoulder functionWolf motor function test

Identifiers

PMID31279331
PMCPMC6612085

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.