Reliability of the Italian Version of the Fugl-Meyer Upper Extremity Scale Administered Remotely
Author Information
Author(s): Falchini Francesca, Germanotta Marco, Fasano Alessio, Cortellini Laura, Insalaco Sabina, Cipollini Valeria, Papadopoulou Dionysia, Aprile Irene Giovanna
Primary Institution: IRCCS Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi ONLUS, Florence, Italy
Hypothesis
This study aims to examine the intrarater and interrater reliability of the Italian version of the Fugl-Meyer Assessment Upper Extremity scale administered remotely via video conferencing during a robotic telerehabilitation program.
Conclusion
The findings suggest that the remote administration of the FMA-UE scale is a reliable tool for assessing upper limb motor function in stroke patients, supporting its use in telerehabilitation settings.
Supporting Evidence
- Bland–Altman analysis showed no systematic variance for both intrarater and interrater reliability of the FMA-UE scale.
- Excellent reliability was found with intrarater ICC = 0.972 and interrater ICC = 0.981.
- Sections A and C of the FMA-UE showed excellent intrarater reliability, while sections B and D had satisfactory results.
- Both intrarater and interrater reliability analysis of the total score of the FMA-UE scale also showed strong agreement with Cohen’s Kappa values above 0.70.
Takeaway
This study shows that doctors can reliably check how well stroke patients can use their arms, even when they are at home, using video calls.
Methodology
Twenty stroke patients participated in 20 sessions of remote upper limb rehabilitation with a robotic device, with evaluations conducted in-person and remotely.
Limitations
The study has a relatively small sample size and is a secondary analysis of a larger study focused on telerehabilitation.
Participant Demographics
{"age":"66 ± 9 (52–82)","sex":"11 men, 9 women","dominant_side":"18 right-handed, 2 left-handed","height":"165.5 ± 10.3 (150–182)","weight":"68.1 ± 13.8 (42–90)","schooling_years":"11.5 ± 5.5 (5–18)"}
Statistical Information
P-Value
p = 0.492 (T0 vs. Tele1), p = 0.130 (Tele3 vs. T1)
Confidence Interval
{"intrarater":"95% CI = 0.927 to 0.989","interrater":"95% CI = 0.952 to 0.993"}
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website