Advertisement

Psychometric evaluation of the Southampton hand assessment procedure (SHAP) in a sample of upper limb prosthesis users

      Highlights

      • The SHAP measures function in upper limb amputation but many items are too difficult
      • Validity of the SHAP overall score, the IOF, was supported
      • The validity of individual grip scores of the SHAP was not supported.
      • We examined properties of the SHAP and proposed a modified version, the P-IOF
      • The P-IOF is valid, takes less time to administer and is easy to score

      Abstract

      Background

      The 26-item Southampton Hand Assessment Protocol (SHAP) is a test of prosthetic hand function that generates an Index of Functionality (IOF), and prehensile pattern (PP) scores. Prior researchers identified potential issues in SHAP scoring, proposing alternative scoring methods (LIF and W-LIF).

      Study design

      Cross-sectional study.

      Purpose

      Evaluate the psychometric properties of the SHAP IOF, LIF, and W-LIF and PP scores and develop the Prosthesis Index of Functionality (P-IOF).

      Methods

      We examined item completion, floor andceiling effects, concurrent, discriminant, construct and structural validity. The P-IOF used increased boundary limits and information from item completion and completion time. Calibration used a nonlinear mixed model. Scores were estimated using maximum a posteriori Bayesian estimation. Mixed integer linear programing (MILP) informed development of a shorter measure. Validity analyses were repeated using the P-IOF.

      Results

      126 persons, mean age 57 (sd 15.8), 69% with transradial amputation were included. Floors effects were observed in 18.3%-19.1% for the IOF, LIF, and W-LIF. Ten items were not completed by >15% of participants. Boundary limits were problematic for all but 1 item. Correlations with dexterity measures were strong (r =  0.54-0.73). Scores differed by amputation level (p > .0001). Factor analysis did not support use of PP scores. The P-IOF used expanded boundary limits to decrease floor effects. MILP identified 10 items that could be dropped. The 26-item P-IOF and 16-item P-IOF had reduced floor effects (<7.5%), strong evidence of concurrent and discriminant validity, and construct validity. P-IOF reduced administrative burden by 9.5 (sd 5.6) minutes.

      Discussion

      Floor effects limit a measure's ability to distinguish between persons with low function.

      Conclusion

      Analyses supported the validity of the SHAP IOF, LIF, and W-LIF, but identified large floor effects, as well as issues with structural validity of the PP scores. The 16-item P-IOF minimizes floor effects and reduces administrative burden.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Journal of Hand Therapy
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Light CM
        • Chappell PH
        • Kyberd PJ
        Establishing a standardized clinical assessment tool of pathologic and prosthetic hand function: normative data, reliability, and validity.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002; 83: 776-783
        • Amsuess S
        • Vujaklija I
        • Goebel P
        • Roche AD
        • Graimann B
        • Aszmann OC
        • Farina D
        Context-dependent upper limb prosthesis control for natural and robust use.
        IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2016; 24: 744-753
        • Boni I
        • Millenaar J
        • Controzzi M
        • Ortiz-Catalan M
        Restoring natural forearm rotation in transradial osseointegrated amputees.
        IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2018; 26: 2333-2341
        • Bouwsema H
        • Kyberd PJ
        • Hill W
        • van der Sluis CK
        • Bongers RM
        Determining skill level in myoelectric prosthesis use with multiple outcome measures.
        J Rehabil Res Dev. 2012; 49: 1331-1347
        • Deijs M
        • Bongers RM
        • Ringeling-van Leusen NDM
        • van der Sluis CK
        Flexible and static wrist units in upper limb prosthesis users: functionality scores, user satisfaction and compensatory movements.
        J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2016; 13https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-016-0130-0
        • Hargrove LJ
        • Miller LA
        • Turner K
        • Kuiken TA
        Myoelectric pattern recognition outperforms direct control for transhumeral amputees with targeted muscle reinnervation: a randomized clinical trial.
        Sci Rep. 2017; 7
        • Head JS
        • Howard D
        • Hutchins SW
        • Kenney L
        • Heath GH
        • Aksenov AY.
        The use of an adjustable electrode housing unit to compare electrode alignment and contact variation with myoelectric prosthesis functionality: A pilot study.
        Prosthet Orthot Int. 2016; 40: 123-128
        • Kuiken TA
        • Miller LA
        • Turner K
        • Hargrove LJ.
        A comparison of pattern recognition control and direct control of a multiple degree-of-freedom transradial prosthesis.
        IEEE J Transl Eng He Med. 2016; 4
        • Kyberd PJ
        • Murgia A
        • Gasson M
        • et al.
        Case studies to demonstrate the range of applications of the southampton hand assessment procedure.
        British Journal of Occupational Therapy. 2009; 72: 212-218
        • Luchetti M
        • Cutti AG
        • Verni G
        • Sacchetti R
        • Rossi N
        Impact of Michelangelo prosthetic hand: Findings from a crossover longitudinal study.
        J Rehabil Res Dev. 2015; 52: 605-618
        • Perry BN
        • Moran CW
        • Armiger RS
        • Pasquina PF
        • Vandersea JW
        • Tsao JW
        Initial clinical evaluation of the modular prosthetic limb.
        Front Neurol. 2018; 9
        • Roche AD
        • Vujaklija I
        • Amsüss S
        • Sturma A
        • Göbel P
        • Farina D
        • Aszmann OC
        A structured rehabilitation protocol for improved multifunctional prosthetic control: a case study.
        Jove-J Vis Exp. 2015; e52968
        • Salminger S
        • Vujaklija I
        • Sturma A
        • et al.
        Functional outcome scores with standard myoelectric prostheses in below-elbow amputees.
        Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2019; 98: 125-129
        • Schiefer M
        • Tan D
        • Sidek SM
        • Tyler DJ
        Sensory feedback by peripheral nerve stimulation improves task performance in individuals with upper limb loss using a myoelectric prosthesis.
        J Neural Eng. 2016; 13
        • Segil JL
        • Huddle SA
        • Weir RFF.
        Functional assessment of a myoelectric postural controller and multi-functional prosthetic hand by persons with trans-radial limb loss.
        IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2017; 25: 618-627
        • van der Niet O
        • Bongers RM
        • van der Sluis CK.
        Functionality of i-LIMB and i-LIMB Pulse hands: Case report.
        J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013; 50: 1123-1128
        • Berning K
        • Cohick S
        • Johnson R
        • Miller LA
        • Sensinger JW.
        Comparison of body-powered voluntary opening and voluntary closing prehensor for activities of daily life.
        J Rehabil Res Dev. 2014; 51: 253-261
        • Wanamaker AB
        • Whelan LR
        • Farley J
        • Chaudhari AMW.
        Biomechanical analysis of users of multi-articulating externally powered prostheses with and without their device.
        Prosthet Orthot Int. 2019; 43: 618-628
        • Kuret Z
        • Burger H
        • Vidmar G.
        Influence of finger amputation on grip strength and objectively measured hand function: a descriptive cross-sectional study.
        Int J Rehabil Res. 2015; 38: 181-188
        • Kuret Z
        • Burger H
        • Vidmar G
        • Maver T
        Impact of silicone prosthesis on hand function, grip power and grip-force tracking ability after finger amputation.
        Prosthet Orthot Int. 2016; 40: 744-750
        • Kyberd PJ
        The influence of control format and hand design in single axis myoelectric hands: assessment of functionality of prosthetic hands using the southampton hand assessment procedure.
        Prosthet Orthot Int. 2011; 35: 285-293
        • Fougner AL
        • Stavdahl O
        • Kyberd PJ
        System training and assessment in simultaneous proportional myoelectric prosthesis control.
        J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2014; : 11
        • Baumann ML
        • Cancio JM
        • Yancosek KE
        The suitcase packing activity: A new evaluation of hand function.
        J Hand Ther. 2017; 30: 359-366
        • Huinink LHB
        • Bouwsema H
        • Plettenburg DH
        • van der Sluis CK
        • Bongers RM
        Learning to use a body-powered prosthesis: changes in functionality and kinematics.
        J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2016; 13
        • Montagnani F
        • Controzzi M
        • Cipriani C
        Is it finger or wrist dexterity that is missing in current hand prostheses?.
        IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2015; 23: 600-609
        • Segil JL
        • Controzzi M
        • Weir RFF
        • Cipriani C
        Comparative study of state-of-the-art myoelectric controllers for multigrasp prosthetic hands.
        J Rehabil Res Dev. 2014; 51: 1439-1454
        • Sensinger JW
        • Lipsey J
        • Thomas A
        • Turner K.
        Design and evaluation of voluntary opening and voluntary closing prosthetic terminal device.
        J Rehabil Res Dev. 2015; 52: 63-75
        • Sobuh MMD
        • Kenney LPJ
        • Galpin AJ
        • et al.
        Visuomotor behaviours when using a myoelectric prosthesis.
        J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2014; 72: 11
        • Vasluian E
        • Bongers RM
        • Reinders-Messelink HLA
        • Burgerhof JGM
        • Dijkstra PU
        • van der Sluis CK
        Learning effects of repetitive administration of the southampton hand assessment procedure in novice prosthetic users.
        J Rehabil Med. 2014; 46: 788-797
        • Vasluian E
        • Bongers RM
        • Reinders-Messelink HA
        • Dijkstra PU
        • van der Sluis CK
        Preliminary study of the southampton hand assessment procedure for children and its reliability.
        Bmc Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2014; : 15
        • Burgerhof JGM
        • Vasluian E
        • Dijkstra PU
        • Bongers RM
        • van der Sluis CK
        The southampton hand assessment procedure revisited: a transparent linear scoring system, applied to data of experienced prosthetic users.
        J Hand Ther. 2017; 30: 49-57
        • Spiers AJ
        • Resnik L
        • Dollar AM
        Analyzing at-home prosthesis use in unilateral upper-limb amputees to inform treatment & device design.
        IEEE Int Conf Rehabil Robot. 2017; 2017: 1273-1280
        • Resnik L
        • Ekerholm S
        • Borgia M
        • Clark MA
        A national study of veterans with major upper limb amputation: survey methods, participants, and summary findings.
        PLoS One. 2019; 14e0213578
        • Resnik L
        • Borgia M
        Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the QuickDASH in patients with upper limb amputation.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015; 96: 1676-1683
        • Mathiowetz V
        • Volland G
        • Kashman N
        • Weber K
        Adult norms for the box and block test of manual dexterity.
        Am J Occup Ther. 1985; 39: 386-391
        • Oxford Grice K
        • Vogel KA
        • Le V
        • Mitchell A
        • Muniz S
        • Vollmer MA
        Adult norms for a commercially available nine hole peg test for finger dexterity.
        Am J Occup Ther. 2003; 57: 570-573
        • Iqbal U
        • Rogers W
        • Selim A
        • et al.
        The Veterans RAND 12 Item Health Survey (VR12): What is it and How it is Used.
        RAND Health, 2009
        • Gummesson C
        • Ward MM
        • Atroshi I
        The shortened disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand questionnaire (QuickDASH): validity and reliability based on responses within the full-length DASH.
        BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2006; 7: 44
        • Rijmen F
        • Tuerlinckx F
        • De Boeck P
        • Kuppens P
        A nonlinear mixed model framework for item response theory.
        Psychol Methods. 2003; 8: 185-205
        • Laird NM
        • Ware JH
        Random-effects models for longitudinal data.
        Biometrics. 1982; 38: 963-974
        • Muthén LK
        • Muthén BO
        Mplus User's Guide.
        Muthén & Muthén, Los Angeles, CA2017
        • Birnbaum A
        Statistical theory for logistic mental test models with a prior distribution of ability.
        J Math Psychol. 1969; 6: 258-276
        • Diao Q
        • van der Linden WJ
        Automated test assembly using Ip_solve version 5.5 in R.
        Appl Psychol Meas. 2011; 35: 398-409
        • Baker F
        • Kim SH
        Item Response Theory: Parameter Estimation.
        Marcel Dekker, New York, New York2004
        • Diao Q
        • van der Linden WJ
        Automated test assembly using Ip_solve version 5.5 in R.
        Appl Psychol Meas. 2011; 35: 398-409
        • Schiefer MA
        • Graczyk EL
        • Sidik SM
        • Tan DW
        • Tyler DJ
        Artificial tactile and proprioceptive feedback improves performance and confidence on object identification tasks.
        Plos One. 2018; 13
        • Kyberd PJ
        The influence of passive wrist joints on the functionality of prosthetic hands.
        Prosthet Orthot Int. 2012; 36: 33-38