Reliability and Validity of Physical Tools and Measurement Methods to Quantify Hand Swelling: A Systematic Review

Abstract Objective Hand swelling may result from injury or trauma. Various physical assessment tools and measurement methods can be used to quantify the volume or size of the hand or fingers; however, the reliability and validity of each tool and measurement method have not been evaluated. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability and validity of physical assessment tools and methods used to quantify hand and finger volume or size. Methods MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched using key terms related to swelling, edema, volume, size, hand, measures, reliability and validity. Cross-sectional or longitudinal studies that assessed reliability and/or validity of physical assessment tools or measurement methods to quantify hand swelling. Two examiners independently extracted data from the included articles and appraised the articles’ quality using the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology. Data extracted from studies analysing reliability and validity were grouped by type of assessment tool and measurement method. Conclusions Five physical assessment tools used for quantification of hand swelling were evaluated. All measurement methods with these tools had good to excellent reliability and moderate to high validity. The evidence underpinning the figure-of-eight technique, which uses a tape measure, was the highest. Because these physical assessment tools and measurement methods assess different aspects and regions of the hand, which one is selected would depend on the region of interest for assessment and the availability of tools. Impact Reliable tools and measurement methods are available to measure the size or volume of the hand and fingers, either together or separately. The best tool will depend on the aim of assessment and tool availability.

Download Full-text

Observational Pain Assessment Instruments for Use With Nonverbal Patients at the End-of-life: A Systematic Review

Journal of Palliative Care ◽

10.1177/0825859718816073 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 34 (4) ◽

pp. 255-266 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Diane Tapp ◽

Sara Chenacher ◽

Ngangue Patrice Alain Gérard ◽

Philippe Bérubé-Mercier ◽

Celine Gelinas ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Palliative Care ◽

End Of Life ◽

Pain Assessment ◽

Reliability And Validity ◽

Assessment Tools ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Severe Illness ◽

Assessment Instruments ◽

Measurement Instruments ◽

Health Measurement

Purpose: To review studies pertaining to the reliability and validity of observational pain assessment tools for use with nonverbal patients at the end-of-life, a field of research not documented by previous systematic reviews. Methods: Databases (PubMed, Embase, Epistemonikos, the Cochrane Library, and CINAHL) were systematically searched for studies from study inception to February 21, 2016 (update in May 9, 2018). Two independent reviewers screened study titles, abstracts, and full texts according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Disagreements were resolved through consensus. Reviewers also extracted the psychometrics properties of studies of observational pain assessment instruments dedicated to a noncommunicative population in palliative care or at the end-of-life. A comprehensive quality assessment was conducted using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) to derive poor, fair, good or excellent ratings for the psychometric tests reported in each study. Results: Four studies linked to 4 different tools met the inclusion criteria. Study populations included dementia, palliative care and severe illness in the context of intensive care. All the studies included in this review obtained poor COSMIN ratings overall. Conclusions: At this point, it is impossible to recommend any of the tools evaluated given the low number and quality of the studies. Other analyses and studies need to be conducted to develop, adapt, or further validate observational pain instruments for the end-of-life population, regardless of the disease.

Download Full-text

Chinesisation, adaptation and validation of the Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment Tool in critically ill patients: a cross-sectional observational study

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045550 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (4) ◽

pp. e045550

Author(s):

Zhigang Zhang ◽

Guoqiang Wang ◽

Yuchen Wu ◽

Jin Guo ◽

Nannan Ding ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Critical Care ◽

Observational Study ◽

Critically Ill ◽

Content Validity ◽

Assessment Tool ◽

Western China ◽

Validity Index ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Physical Assessment ◽

Content Validity Index

PurposeTo translate and adapt the Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment Tool (CPAx) into Chinese version (‘CPAx-Chi’), test the reliability and validity of CPAx-Chi, and verify the cut-off point for the diagnosis of intensive care unit-acquired weakness (ICU-AW).Study designCross-sectional observational study.MethodsForward and back translation, cross-cultural adaptation and pretesting of CPAx into CPAx-Chi were based on the Brislin model. Participants were recruited from the general ICU of five third-grade class-A hospitals in western China. Two hundred critically ill adult patients (median age: 53 years; 64% men) with duration of ICU stay ≥48 hours and Glasgow Coma Scale ≥11 were included in this study. Two researchers simultaneously and independently assessed eligible patients using the Medical Research Council Muscle Score (MRC-Score) and CPAx-Chi.ResultsThe content validity index of items was 0.889. The content validity index of scale was 0.955. Taking the MRC-Score scale as standard, the criterion validity of CPAx-Chi was r=0.758 (p<0.001) for researcher A, and r=0.65 (p<0.001) for researcher B. Cronbach’s α was 0.939. The inter-rater reliability was 0.902 (p<0.001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves of CPAx-Chi for diagnosing ICU-AW based on MRC-Score ≤48 were 0.899 (95% CI 0.862 to 1.025) and 0.874 (95% CI 0.824 to 0.925) for researcher B. The best cut-off point for CPAx-Chi for the diagnosis of ICU-AW was 31.5. The sensitivity was 87% and specificity was 77% for researcher A, whereas it was 0.621, 31.5, 75% and 87% for researcher B, respectively. The consistency was high when taking CPAx-Chi ≤31 and MRC-Score ≤48 as the cut-off points for the diagnosis of ICU-AW. Cohen’s kappa=0.845 (p=0.02) in researcher A and 0.839 (p=0.04) for researcher B.ConclusionsCPAx-Chi demonstrated content validity, criterion-related validity and reliability. CPAx-Chi showed the best accuracy in assessment of patients at risk of ICU-AW with good sensitivity and specificity at a recommended cut-off of 31.

Download Full-text

Development and Testing of the Foot Care Scale for Older Japanese Diabetic Patients

The International Journal of Lower Extremity Wounds ◽

10.1177/15347346211045033 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 153473462110450

Author(s):

Sayuri Sable-Morita ◽

Yuki Arai ◽

Sanae Takanashi ◽

Keita Aimoto ◽

Mika Okura ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Older Adults ◽

Assessment Tool ◽

Reliability And Validity ◽

Japanese Patients ◽

Skin Condition ◽

Diabetic Patients ◽

Foot Care ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Patients With Diabetes ◽

Care Practices

We aimed to develop and test the reliability and validity of a foot care self-management assessment tool for older Japanese patients with diabetes. In this cross-sectional observational study, which was carried out according to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines, additional items were developed and selected to reflect older Japanese patients’ needs a thorough investigation with experts in diabetes and geriatrics. A total of 200 older patients with diabetes in a foot care outpatient clinic were included in the study to finalize the scale items and verify the scale's reliability and validity. A factor analysis yielded a 4-factor, 9-item scale. Factors 1 to 4 were “skin condition” (3 items), “nail clipping” (2 items), “attention to wounds” (2 items), and “relationships with others” (2 items). The Cronbach's α coefficients for the 4 factors were .852, .900, .820, and .571, respectively. The overall scale was 0.797, indicating good internal consistency. Spearman's correlation coefficients for each of the 4 factors with the scale's total score showed good stability; all correlations were significant. In Japan's super-aged society, it is important to focus on foot care practices among older adults and to promote good foot care practices among early older adults so that they can practice self-care at home. Therefore, a scale for comprehensively evaluating foot care in elderly patients with diabetes is needed. The Foot Care Scale for Older Diabetics could be useful as a tool for assessing the ability to self-manage foot care in older Japanese patients with diabetes.

Download Full-text

The Association Between Breastfeeding Duration and Language Development Survey (LDS) Score in Children Aged 18 - 35 months

10.21203/rs.3.rs-580559/v1 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Andi Faradilah ◽

Andi Musafir Rusyaidi ◽

Syatirah Jalaluddin ◽

Ary I Savitri

Keyword(s):

Language Development ◽

Assessment Tool ◽

Multiple Logistic Regression Analysis ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Study Data ◽

Assessment Tools ◽

Language Delay ◽

World Health ◽

Breastfeeding Duration ◽

Cross Sectional

Abstract Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) campaign on breastfeeding as the best source of nourishment for new-born and young children has contributed to increase public’s concern about the practice. Furthermore, several medical studies showed the benefit of breastfeeding on children’s cognitive function, including language development. However, most of the language assessment tools used in such studies had limited ability in identifying children’s language delay. Language Development Survey (LDS), as a recently developed assessment tool, is expected to provide more detailed information in the area especially related to treatment strategy purposes. This study was aimed to examine the association between breastfeeding duration and children’s LDS score. Methods: This cross-sectional study collected data from 286 breastfeeding mothers with children aged 18-35 months old. Children with delayed growth were excluded from the study. Data on breastfeeding duration (BF) and subjects’ characteristics were obtained using a questionnaire. Mother’s Body mass index (BMI) and children’s weight-for-age were measured as proxies for nutritional status. The LDS-word checklist was administered to assess children’s vocabulary and phrase development. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to examine the association. Results: The findings revealed that 158 children (55.2%) were breastfed for more than 18 months (BF > 18 mos), 78 children (27%) for 7-18 months (BF 7-18 mos) and 50 children (17.5%) for 6 months or less (BF B 6 mos). Language delays were detected in 91 (31.8%) children (scores on LDS-vocabulary) and in 51 (35.7%) children (scores on LDS-phrase). Breastfeeding duration did not associate with the occurrence of language delay based either on LDS-vocabulary or on LDS-phrase score criteria. In comparison with BF a 6 mos, BF 7-18 mos had adjusted OR (aOR) for language delay of 0.86 (0.30 to 2.47, p 0.79) based on vocabulary score and aOR 0.8 (0.18 to 3.55, p 0.78) based on phrase score, while > 18 months had aOR of 0.57 (0.23 to 1.42, p 0.23) and aOR 0.46 (0.14 to 1.67, p 0.25), respectively. Conclusion: Breastfeeding duration was not associated with the occurrence of language delay. This observation merits further investigations on duration in each breastfeeding time and prospective studies to investigate its association with children language development.

Download Full-text

Heart Check: The Development and Evolution of an Organizational Heart Health Assessment

American Journal of Health Promotion ◽

10.4278/0890-1171-17.2.132 ◽

2002 ◽

Vol 17 (2) ◽

pp. 132-153 ◽

Cited By ~ 30

Author(s):

Thomas Golaszewski ◽

Brian Fisher

Keyword(s):

New York ◽

Organizational Support ◽

Assessment Tool ◽

New York State ◽

Health Assessment ◽

Reliability And Validity ◽

Nutrition Support ◽

Future Research ◽

Heart Health ◽

Cross Sectional

Purpose. The purpose of this article is to document the development, testing, and application of an organizational assessment tool used to measure employer support for heart health. Additional information is presented on its future research and applications plan. Design. This article represents the pooling of results from multiple studies using a variety of designs, including pilot tests, cross-sectional analyses, and quasi-experiments. Setting. Worksites covering the spectrum of employers across industry types and size, and throughout all of New York State. Subjects. Over 10,000 New York employees and 1000 New York employers are represented in the multiple phases of this research. Measures. Heart Check is a 226-item inventory designed to measure such features in the worksite as organizational foundations, administrative supports, tobacco control, nutrition support, physical activity support, stress management, screening services, and company demographics. Additional side studies used professional judgments and behavioral surveys. Results. As an assessment tool Heart Check shows evidence for reliability and validity. Applications of the instrument show characteristics that define high-scoring companies, quasi standards for New York employers, and, when applied during interventions, positive changes in organizational support levels. Conclusions. A relatively inexpensive, easy-to-use, and metrically tested instrument exists for measuring the construct of organizational support for employee heart health. The instrument shows promise as part of a system to enhance heart health through public health-based interventions in the workplace.

Download Full-text

Interrater and Intrarater Reliability and Validity of 3 Measurement Methods for Shoulder-Position Sense

Journal of Sport Rehabilitation ◽

10.1123/jsr.2014-0309 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 25 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Amir K. Vafadar ◽

Julie N. Cote ◽

Philippe S. Archambault

Keyword(s):

Critical Role ◽

Intraclass Correlation ◽

Reliability And Validity ◽

Position Sense ◽

Joint Position Sense ◽

Measurement Methods ◽

Shoulder Injuries ◽

Laser Pointer ◽

Shoulder Injury ◽

Cross Sectional

Context: Joint-position sense (JPS) plays a critical role in the stability of shoulder joint. Restoration of JPS is essential to improve rehabilitation outcomes in individuals with shoulder injury. However, the number of affordable and reliable shoulder-JPS measurement methods for everyday clinical practice is limited. Objective:To estimate reliability and validity of 3 simple shoulder-JPS measurement methods. Design: Cross-sectional study. Participants: 25 healthy men and women. Main Outcome Measure: Absolute-error scores of JPS in 3 ranges of shoulder flexion (low, mid, and high), measured with a laser pointer, an inclinometer, and a goniometer in 2 separate sessions (48 h apart). Results: Overall interrater and intrarater intraclass correlation coefficients were .86 and .78 for the laser pointer, .67 and .70 for the inclinometer, and .60 and .50 for the goniometer, respectively. There was excellent reliability in the low range for the laser pointer and inclinometer methods, but fair to good and poor reliability in mid- and high ranges, respectively. All methods showed strong validity. Conclusion: The laser pointer and inclinometer JPS measurement methods are reliable and can be used by clinicians during rehabilitation of shoulder injuries.

Download Full-text

Risk of behaviour suggestive of opioid abuse: a protocol for a systematic review of validated assessment tools

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2018-021948 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 8 (10) ◽

pp. e021948

Author(s):

Sheila Raposo Galindo ◽

Tatiana de Paula Santana da Silva ◽

Manoel Henrique da Nóbrega Marinho ◽

Carlos Eduardo de Souza Leão Ribeiro ◽

Murilo Duarte da Costa Lima ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Cancer Pain ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Opioid Abuse ◽

Assessment Tools ◽

Measurement Instruments ◽

Opioid Use ◽

Health Measurement ◽

Registration Number ◽

The Individual

IntroductionOpioid use patterns of individuals with non-cancer pain are influenced by the behavioural dynamics of the individual in managing and properly following the prescription. The use of assessment tools for measuring the risk of behaviour suggestive of opioid abuse is important for health professionals who provide care to individuals with non-cancer pain. The aim of the proposed review is to analyse the psychometric properties of tools for measuring the risk of behaviour suggestive of opioid abuse in adults with non-cancer pain.Methods and analysisThe review process will be based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols. The Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments will be used to analyse the assessment tools. Two independent reviewers will perform the literature search and analysis procedures. Searches will be performed on PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, Scopus, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases, and the ‘snowball’ strategy will be employed. The inclusion criteria will be (1) validation studies, (2) assessment tools designed exclusively for measuring the risk of behaviour suggestive of opioid abuse and (3) assessment tools designed for evaluation of adults with chronic non-cancer pain. The titles and abstracts of the studies retrieved from the databases will be analysed for the preselection of articles, which will be submitted to a full-text analysis to define the final sample. Divergence of opinion between two reviewers will be resolved by consulting a third reviewer.Ethics and disseminationThe review will offer an overview of assessment tools available for measuring the risk of behaviour suggestive of opioid abuse, which is relevant to reducing the risk of deaths due to abusive consumption and for clinical management of adults with chronic non-cancer pain.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018081577.

Download Full-text

Development and validation of the Health-Friendly Activity Index: an assessment tool to comprehensively measure health-friendly activities of corporations or organisations

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2021-048768 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (7) ◽

pp. e048768

Author(s):

Young Ho Yun ◽

Si Nae Oh ◽

Jin-Ah Sim ◽

Sujee Lee ◽

Eun-Jung Sohn

Keyword(s):

Assessment Tool ◽

Activity Index ◽

Reliability And Validity ◽

Correlation Coefficients ◽

Field Testing ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Corporate Managers ◽

Health Related ◽

Development And Validation

ObjectivesWe developed the Health-Friendly Activity Index (HFAI) to comprehensively measure the health-friendly activities of corporations or organisations. We validated the developed tool and reported on its use as an assessment tool to improve consumers’ health-related outcomes.DesignThis was a cross-sectional study.SettingDevelopment of the HFAI questionnaire followed a three-phase process: item generation, item construction and validation with field testing. Using relevance and feasibility criteria, we developed a 105-item questionnaire with six domains (Governance and Infrastructure, Needs Assessment, Planning, Implementation, Monitoring and Feedback, and Outcomes).ParticipantsTo assess the sensitivity and validity of the questionnaire, the HFAI and Contribution Assessment Tool for Consumer’s Health (CATCH) were administered to 302 participants (151 employers and 151 employees) from 151 Korean companies.Primary outcome measuresThe CATCH measured the contribution of each company to the physical, mental, social and spiritual health of its consumers. To estimate the reliability and validity of all six HFAI domains and their respective scales, Cronbach’s α coefficients and correlation coefficients were used.ResultsEach domain and scale of the HFAI exhibited a Cronbach’s α coefficient between 0.80 and 0.98 for the employers and employees. The overall HFAI and its six domains correlated significantly and positively with all health outcomes such as physical, mental, social and spiritual status scores evaluated using the CATCH (Spearman’s correlation range: 0.37–0.68).ConclusionThe HFAI, a unique assessment tool with acceptable psychometric properties, can help corporate managers assess their health-friendly activities.

Download Full-text

N-PASS Versus mPAT in Assessment and Management of Neonatal Pain at Neonatal ICUs in Palestine

International Journal of Innovative Research in Medical Science ◽

10.23958/ijirms/vol04-i06/688 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 4 (06) ◽

Author(s):

Khamis Elessi ◽

Shireen Abed ◽

Tayseer Jamal Afifi ◽

Rawan Utt ◽

Mahmood Elblbessy ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Pain Score ◽

Pain Assessment ◽

Assessment Tool ◽

Disease Process ◽

Reliability And Validity ◽

Internal Consistency Reliability ◽

Assessment Tools ◽

Therapeutic Interventions ◽

P Value ◽

Neonatal Pain

Background: Neonates frequently experience pain as a result of diagnostic or therapeutic interventions or as a result of a disease process. Neonates cannot verbalize their pain experience and depend on others to recognize, assess and manage their pain. Neonates may suffer immediate or long-term consequences of unrelieved pain. Accurate assessment of pain is essential to provide adequate management. Observational scales, which include physiological and behavioral responses to pain, are available to aid consistent pain management. Pain assessment is considered as the fifth vital sign. Objectives: Aims of the present study were (1) to compare two commonly cited neonatal pain assessment tools, Neonatal Pain, Agitation and Sedation Scale (N-PASS) and modified Pain Assessment Tool (mPAT), with regard to their psychometric qualities, (2) to explore intuitive clinicians' ratings by relating them to the tools' items and (3) to ensure that neonates receive adequate pain control. Methods: Two coders applied both pain assessment tools to 850 neonates while undergoing a painful or a stressful procedure. Each neonate was assessed before, during and after the procedure. The evaluation before and after the procedure was done using NPASS, while pain score during the procedure was assessed by mPAT. Analyses of variances and regression analyses were used to investigate whether tools could discriminate between the procedures and whether tools' items were predictors of pain severity. Results: Internal consistency, reliability and validity were high for both assessment tools. N-PASS tool discriminated between painful and stressful situations better than mPAT. There was no relation between the age of neonate and the pain score. Moreover, P-value was statistically significant between mPAT score and post procedural assessment score as well as between pre and post procedural assessment scores. Conclusion: Both assessment tools performed equally well regarding physiologic parameters. However, N-PASS makes it possible to assess pain during sedation. It was noticed that gaps exist between practitioner knowledge and attitude regarding neonatal pain.

Download Full-text