liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Motor assessment score. Is it fit for the future?
Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, QLD, Australia.
Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, QLD, Australia.
Health Sciences, Bond University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-4318-9216
Health Sciences, Bond University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia.
2014 (English)In: Special Issue: SMART STROKES 2014 Conference, 28-29 August 2014, Sheraton on the Park, Sydney, NSW, Australia, John Wiley & Sons, 2014, Vol. Vol 9 (Suppl. 2), 10-10 p.Conference paper, Abstract (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Background: The Motor Assessment Scale (MAS) is commonly used to assess functional change in stroke patients. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the scale does not accurately reflect patient outcomes potentially impacting on physiotherapists’ use of the scale.

Aims: This study aims to investigate physiotherapists use and perceived utility of the MAS to measure functional performance of stroke survivors undergoing rehabilitation.

Method: A purpose-designed 29-item online survey was distributed to Queensland Rehabilitation Physiotherapy Network members. Open and closed questions were asked regarding demographics, MAS implementation, perception of item subtest hierarchy and levels of difficulty and adherence to scoring guidelines.

Results: Thirty-one surveys were received; 63% were from physiotherapists in metropolitan centers, 84% from public hospitals and 61% insubacute settings. Approximately half (45%) had been practicing in neurological rehabilitation for 5–10 years. More than 70% of respondents routinely used the MAS. The majority (80%) reported using the recommended guidelines when scoring the MAS, though 55% did not score all subsets of Item 8. Most were dissatisfied with hierarchy and levels of difficulty of item subtests, with no item scoring 100% satisfaction by respondents. Thirty percent of respondents did not use the MAS. Common reasons included: too time consuming (56%), not sensitive to change (22%), lack of confidence in administration (33%), items not relevant for patient function (45%) and ceiling effect (44%).

Conclusion: MAS use varies across rehabilitation units in Queensland. Difficulties were identified with all items, including use of recommended scoring guidelines. Further research is required to address these issues.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
John Wiley & Sons, 2014. Vol. Vol 9 (Suppl. 2), 10-10 p.
Series
, International Journal of Stroke, ISSN 1747-4949 ; Vol. 9
National Category
Neurology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-123553DOI: 10.1111/ijs.12334OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-123553DiVA: diva2:886193
Conference
SMART STROKES 2014 Conference, Sydney, NSW, Australia, 28-29 August 2014
Available from: 2015-12-21 Created: 2015-12-21 Last updated: 2016-01-07Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Abbott, Allan
Neurology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 92 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link