Italian Stroke Upper Limb Capacity Scale: Translation, adaptation, and psychometric evaluation
Rattachement africain : ch, it. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Introduction: The Stroke Upper Limb Capacity Scale (SULCS) assesses poststroke arm function, movement, and rehabilitation potential, aiding in treatment planning and progress monitoring. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the newly developed Italian version of the SULCS. Method: Conducted in an Italian neurorehabilitation clinic, this prospective cohort study included 51 stroke patients with moderate-to-severe upper-limb hemiparesis recruited from May 2022 to April 2024. The SULCS was administered twice by different raters on the first day, and once more by the first rater the next day. Additional assessments, including the Fugl–Meyer Assessment (FMA), Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), and Box and Block Test (BBT), were administered on the first day. After 3 and 6 weeks, SULCS administration was repeated with FMA and BBT administration. Results: Intra-rater reliability (Kappa = 0.99, ICC = 0.99) and inter-rater reliability (Kappa = 0.98, ICC = 0.98) were high. Spearman’s correlations with ARAT, FMA, and BBT were ρ = 0.88, ρ = 0.87, and ρ = 0.86, respectively (all p < 0.001). The SULCS showed minimal floor and ceiling effects, making it suitable for clinical and research use. Conclusion: The results suggest that the Italian SULCS can easily be included as a valid assessment tool for Italian occupational therapists.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Italian Stroke Upper Limb Capacity Scale: Translation, adaptation, and psychometric evaluation
- Date Crossref
- 17/07/2025
- Éditeur
- SAGE Publications
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.