Accuracy and Reliability of Remote Categorization of Upper Limb Outcome After Stroke

Harry T. Jordan,Cathy M. Stinear

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/15459683241231272

2024-02-17

Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair

Abstract:Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, Ahead of Print. BackgroundThere is an increasing need for motor assessments after stroke that can be performed quickly and remotely. The Fast Outcome Categorization of the Upper Limb after Stroke-4 (FOCUS-4) assessment remotely classifies upper limb outcome into 1 of 4 categories after stroke and was developed via retrospective analysis of Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) scores.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the accuracy and reliability of FOCUS-4 assessments for categorizing upper limb outcome after stroke when administered remotely during a videocall compared to an in-person ARAT.MethodsData were collected from 26 participants at 3 months post-stroke (3M), 27 participants at 6 months post-stroke (6M), and 56 participants at the chronic stage of stroke (>6M). Participants performed an in-person ARAT and a remote FOCUS-4 assessment administered during a videocall, and accuracy was evaluated by comparing the upper limb outcome categories. Participants at the chronic stage of stroke also performed a second remote FOCUS-4 assessment to assess between-day reliability.ResultsOverall accuracy of the remote FOCUS-4 assessment was 88% at 3M and 96% at 6M. Overall accuracy of the first and second remote FOCUS-4 assessments at the chronic stage was 75% and 79%, respectively. Reliability of the FOCUS-4 assessment at the chronic stage was 82%. The remote FOCUS-4 assessment was most accurate and reliable for participants with mild or severe upper limb functional impairment.ConclusionsThe remote FOCUS-4 assessment has potential to classify upper limb functional capacity or to screen possible participants for stroke trials, but external validation is required.

clinical neurology,rehabilitation