Nine-Hole Peg Test: Difference between revisions

mNo edit summary
(Added picture)
 
(9 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
'''Original Editor '''- [[User:Sinead Greenan|Sinead Greenan]]  
'''Original Editor '''- [[User:Sinead Greenan|Sinead Greenan]]  


'''Top Contributors''' - {{Special:Contributors/{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}  
'''Top Contributors''' - {{Special:Contributors/{{FULLPAGENAME}}}}  
</div>  
</div>  
== Objective<br>  ==
== Objective   ==


The '''Nine-Hole Peg Test''' (9HPT) is used to measure finger dexterity in patients with various neurological diagnoses.  
The Nine-Hole Peg Test (9HPT) is used to measure finger [[Dexterity Tests|dexterity]] in patients with various [[Neurological Disorders|neurological]] diagnoses<ref>Stroke Engine. Nine Hole Peg Test. Available from: <nowiki>http://strokengine.ca/en/assessments/nine-hole-peg-test-nhpt/</nowiki> (Accessed 11/08/2022)</ref>.  


== Intended Population<br>  ==
== Intended Population   ==


Patients with Stroke, Brain Injury, Parkinson's Disease
Patients with [[Stroke]], [[Traumatic Brain Injury|Brain Injury]], [[Parkinson's]], [[Multiple Sclerosis (MS)|Multiple Sclerosis]] or other neurological conditions<ref name=":0">Shirley Ryan Ability Lab. Nine Hole Peg Test. Available from: <nowiki>https://www.sralab.org/rehabilitation-measures/nine-hole-peg-test</nowiki> (Accessed 11/08/2022)</ref>.
[[File:9-hole-pin-test.webp|thumb|Example of the equipment]]


== Method of Use  ==
== Method of Use  ==


<u>Description:</u>  
<u>Equipment Required:</u>  


*Administered by asking the client to take the pegs from a container, one by one, and place them into the holes on the board, as quickly as possible  
*Board (wood or plastic): with 9 holes (10 mm diameter, 15 mm depth), placed apart by 32 mm<ref name=":1">Mathiowetz, V., Kashman, N., et al. "Grip and pinch strength: normative data for adults." Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1985 66(2): 69-74</ref><ref>Sommerfeld, D. K., Eek, E. U., et al. "Spasticity after stroke: its occurrence and association with motor impairments and activity limitations." Stroke 2004 35(1): 134-139</ref> or 50 mm<ref name=":2">Heller, A., Wade, D. T., et al. "Arm function after stroke: measurement and recovery over the first three months." Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry 1987 50(6): 714-719</ref>.
*Participants must then remove the pegs from the holes, one by one, and replace them back into the container  
*A container for the pegs: square box (100 x 100 x 10 mm) apart from the board or a shallow round dish at the end of the board<ref name=":3">Grice, K. O., Vogel, K. A., et al. "Adult norms for a commercially available Nine Hole Peg Test for finger dexterity." The American journal of occupational therapy 2003 57(5): 570-573</ref>.
*The board should be placed at the client's midline, with the container holding the pegs oriented towards the hand being tested
*9 pegs (7 mm diameter, 32 mm length)<ref name=":1" />.
*Only the hand being evaluated should perform the test
*A stopwatch.
*Hand not being evaluated is permitted to hold the edge of the board in order to provide stability
 
*Scores are based on the time taken to complete the test activity, recorded in seconds
 
*Alternative scoring - the number of pegs placed in 50 or 100 seconds can be recorded. In this case, results are expressed as the number of pegs placed per second
<u>Description:</u><ref name=":0" />
*Stopwatch should be started from the moment the participant touches the first peg until the moment the last peg hits the container
*Instruct the patient to take the pegs from a container, one by one, and place them into the holes on the board, as quickly as possible, using only the hand being evaluated.
*Then, instruct the patient to remove the pegs from the holes, one by one, and replace them back into the container.
*The evaluator should start the stopwatch as soon as the patient touches the first peg.
*The evaluator should stop the stopwatch once the last peg is in the container.


<br>


<u>Equipment Required:</u>  
<u>Scoring:</u>


*Board (wood or plastic): with 9 holes (10 mm diameter, 15 mm depth), placed apart by 32 mm (Mathiowetz et al, 1985<ref>Mathiowetz, V., Kashman, N., et al. "Grip and pinch strength: normative data for adults." Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1985 66(2): 69-74</ref>; Sommerfeld et al., 2004<ref>Sommerfeld, D. K., Eek, E. U., et al. "Spasticity after stroke: its occurrence and association with motor impairments and activity limitations." Stroke 2004 35(1): 134-139</ref>) or 50 mm (Heller, Wade, Wood, Sunderland, Hewer, &amp; Ward, 1987<ref>Heller, A., Wade, D. T., et al. "Arm function after stroke: measurement and recovery over the first three months." Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry 1987 50(6): 714-719</ref>)
*The number of seconds it takes for the patient to complete the test.  
*A container for the pegs: square box (100 x 100 x 10 mm) apart from the board or a shallow round dish at the end of the board (Grice et al, 2003<ref>Grice, K. O., Vogel, K. A., et al. "Adult norms for a commercially available Nine Hole Peg Test for finger dexterity." The American journal of occupational therapy 2003 57(5): 570-573</ref>)
*Alternative scoring - the number of pegs placed in 50 or 100 seconds can be recorded. In this case, results are expressed as the number of pegs placed per second.
*9 pegs (7 mm diameter, 32 mm length) (Mathiowetz et al, 1985<ref>Mathiowetz, V., Kashman, N., et al. "Grip and pinch strength: normative data for adults." Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1985 66(2): 69-74</ref>)
*A stopwatch


== Reference<br>  ==


{{#ev:youtube|kkyfI5OvfJo}}  
<u>Example:</u>{{#ev:youtube|kkyfI5OvfJo}}  


== Evidence  ==
== Evidence  ==
Line 48: Line 48:


*Excellent test-retest reliability for entire group (ICC = 0.85)  
*Excellent test-retest reliability for entire group (ICC = 0.85)  
*Adequate test-retest reliability for individuals with hand spasticity (ICC = 0.64)Excellent test-retest reliability for individuals without hand spasticity (ICC = 0.86)
*Adequate test-retest reliability for individuals with hand spasticity (ICC = 0.64). Excellent test-retest reliability for individuals without hand spasticity (ICC = 0.86)


''Parkinson's Disease:''  
 
''Parkinson's:''


(Earhart et al, 2011)&nbsp;<ref>Earhart, G. M., Cavanaugh, J. T., et al. "The 9-hole PEG test of upper extremity function: average values, test-retest reliability, and factors contributing to performance in people with Parkinson disease." J Neurol Phys Ther 2011 35(4): 157-163</ref>  
(Earhart et al, 2011)&nbsp;<ref>Earhart, G. M., Cavanaugh, J. T., et al. "The 9-hole PEG test of upper extremity function: average values, test-retest reliability, and factors contributing to performance in people with Parkinson disease." J Neurol Phys Ther 2011 35(4): 157-163</ref>  


*Excellent test retest reliability (ICC = 0.88 for dominant hand and ICC = 0.91 for nondominant hand)
*Excellent test retest reliability (ICC = 0.88 for dominant hand and ICC = 0.91 for nondominant hand)


''Healthy Adults:''  
''Healthy Adults:''  


(Wang et al 2011; n = 305; mean age = 32 (26); age range = 3 - 85 years)&nbsp;<ref>Wang, Y. C., Magasi, S. R., et al. "Assessing dexterity function: a comparison of two alternatives for the NIH Toolbox." Journal of Hand Therapy 2011 24(4): 313-320; quiz 321</ref>  
(Wang et al 2011; n = 305; mean age = 32 (26); age range = 3 - 85 years)&nbsp;<ref name=":4">Wang, Y. C., Magasi, S. R., et al. "Assessing dexterity function: a comparison of two alternatives for the NIH Toolbox." Journal of Hand Therapy 2011 24(4): 313-320; quiz 321</ref>  


*Excellent test retest reliability (ICC = 0.95 for right hand, ICC = 0.92 for left hand)
*Excellent test retest reliability (ICC = 0.95 for right hand, ICC = 0.92 for left hand)
Line 68: Line 70:
<u></u>''Healthy Adults:''  
<u></u>''Healthy Adults:''  


(Grice et al, 2003, Healthy Adults)&nbsp;<ref>Grice, K. O., Vogel, K. A., et al. "Adult norms for a commercially available Nine Hole Peg Test for finger dexterity." The American journal of occupational therapy 2003 57(5): 570-573</ref>
(Grice et al, 2003)&nbsp;<ref name=":3" />  
 
*Excellent interrater reliability for the right hand (r = 0.984) and the left hand (r = 0.993)
 


*Excellent interrater reliability for the right hand (r = 0.984)
''Stroke:''
*Excellent interrater reliability for the left hand (r = 0.993)


''Stroke:'' (Heller et al, 1987; n = 56; mean age = 72 (9.9) years; assessed &lt; 3 months post-stroke, Acute Stroke)&nbsp;<ref>Heller, A., Wade, D. T., et al.  "Arm function after stroke: measurement and recovery over the first three months." Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry 1987 50(6): 714-719</ref>  
(Heller et al, 1987; n = 56; mean age = 72 (9.9) years; assessed &lt; 3 months post-stroke, Acute Stroke)&nbsp;<ref name=":2" />  


*Adequate to excellent intrarater reliability (r = 0.68 to 0.99)  
*Adequate to excellent intrarater reliability (r = 0.68 to 0.99)  
*Excellent interrater reliability (r = 0.75 to 0.99)
*Excellent interrater reliability (r = 0.75 to 0.99)
''Cerebral Palsy:''
(Mendoza-Sánchez et al, 2022)<ref>Mendoza-Sánchez S, Molina-Rueda F, Florencio LL, Carratalá-Tejada M, Cuesta-Gómez A. [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35212827/ Reliability and agreement of the Nine Hole Peg Test in patients with unilateral spastic cerebral palsy]. Eur J Pediatr. 2022 Jun;181(6):2283-2290.</ref>
* Excellent intra-rater inter-session reliability in patients with spastic unilateral CP


=== Validity  ===
=== Validity  ===
Line 87: Line 98:
*Poor predictive validity: NHPT administered at 1 month did not predict functional outcomes at 6 months post stroke
*Poor predictive validity: NHPT administered at 1 month did not predict functional outcomes at 6 months post stroke


''Healthy Adults:''<br>(Wang et al, 2011)&nbsp;<ref>Wang, Y. C., Magasi, S. R., et al. "Assessing dexterity function: a comparison of two alternatives for the NIH Toolbox." Journal of Hand Therapy 2011 24(4): 313-320; quiz 321</ref>  
 
''Healthy Adults:''<br>(Wang et al, 2011)&nbsp;<ref name=":4" />  


*Adequate correlation with the Purdue Pegboard test (p = -0.74 to -0.75)  
*Adequate correlation with the Purdue Pegboard test (p = -0.74 to -0.75)  
*Excellent correlation with the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency (p = -0.87 to -0.89)
*Excellent correlation with the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency (p = -0.87 to -0.89)
''Myotonic Dystrophy'':
(Cutelle et al, 2018)<ref>Cutellè C, Rastelli E, Gibellini M, Greco G, Frezza E, Botta A, Terracciano C, Massa R. [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30270126/ Validation of the Nine Hole Peg Test as a measure of dexterity in myotonic dystrophy type 1.] Neuromuscul Disord. 2018 Nov;28(11):947-951.</ref>
* Found to be a reliable, valid and sensitive test of dexterity in Myotonic Dystrophy Type 1.


<u>Construct Validity:</u>&nbsp;  
<u>Construct Validity:</u>&nbsp;  
Line 97: Line 116:


*Excellent convergent validity with Motricity Index (r = 0.82)
*Excellent convergent validity with Motricity Index (r = 0.82)
''Healthy children:''
(Smith, Hong and Presson, 2000)<ref>Smith YA, Hong E, Presson C. [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10883762/ Normative and validation studies of the Nine-hole Peg Test with children.] Percept Mot Skills. 2000 Jun;90(3 Pt 1):823-43</ref>
* Adequate concurrent validity for screening fine motor dexterity of school-age children.


=== Responsiveness  ===
=== Responsiveness  ===
Line 134: Line 160:


Responsiveness was calculated using the single population effect size method. Values closer to 1.00 = more responsive to change. Low responsiveness &lt; 0.20; moderate responsiveness &lt; 0.50, and high responsiveness &lt; 0.80  
Responsiveness was calculated using the single population effect size method. Values closer to 1.00 = more responsive to change. Low responsiveness &lt; 0.20; moderate responsiveness &lt; 0.50, and high responsiveness &lt; 0.80  
=== Miscellaneous<br>  ===
== Read 4 Credit  ==
<div class="coursebox">
{| class="FCK__ShowTableBorders" border="0" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="1" width="100%"
|-
| [[Image:Quiz-image.jpg|center|150px]]
|
Would you like to earn certification to prove your knowledge on this topic?
All you need to do is pass the quiz relating to this page in the Physiopedia member area.
[https://members.physio-pedia.com/quizzes/outcome-measures-for-movement/https://members.physio-pedia.com/quizzes/dexterity-tests/ Go to quiz]
[http://members.physio-pedia.com/ Find out more about a Physiopedia membership]
|}
</div>
== Links  ==
[http://www.rehabmeasures.org/PDF%20Library/Nine%20Hole%20Peg%20Test%20Instructions.pdf Nine-Hole Peg Test]
== Recent Related Research (from [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/ Pubmed])  ==
<div class="researchbox">
<rss>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/erss.cgi?rss_guid=1hasycEfiSSq6nuwsofIoiNun7SnRzwJQj2FzWV7fpShJrD9_f</rss>
</div>
== References  ==
== References  ==


<references /><br>
<references />


[[Category:Outcome_Measures]] [[Category:Neurology_Outcome_Measures]] [[Category:Stroke]] [[Category:Acquired Brain Injuries]] [[Category:Parkinson's Disease]]
[[Category:Outcome_Measures]]  
[[Category:Neurological - Outcome Measures]]  
[[Category:Stroke]]  
[[Category:Stroke - Outcome Measures]]
[[Category:Acquired Brain Injuries]]  
[[Category:Parkinson's]]
[[Category:Occupational Health]]
[[Category:Head]]
[[Category:Head - Outcome Measures]]

Latest revision as of 15:55, 21 August 2022

 

Objective[edit | edit source]

The Nine-Hole Peg Test (9HPT) is used to measure finger dexterity in patients with various neurological diagnoses[1].

Intended Population[edit | edit source]

Patients with Stroke, Brain Injury, Parkinson's, Multiple Sclerosis or other neurological conditions[2].

Example of the equipment

Method of Use[edit | edit source]

Equipment Required:

  • Board (wood or plastic): with 9 holes (10 mm diameter, 15 mm depth), placed apart by 32 mm[3][4] or 50 mm[5].
  • A container for the pegs: square box (100 x 100 x 10 mm) apart from the board or a shallow round dish at the end of the board[6].
  • 9 pegs (7 mm diameter, 32 mm length)[3].
  • A stopwatch.


Description:[2]

  • Instruct the patient to take the pegs from a container, one by one, and place them into the holes on the board, as quickly as possible, using only the hand being evaluated.
  • Then, instruct the patient to remove the pegs from the holes, one by one, and replace them back into the container.
  • The evaluator should start the stopwatch as soon as the patient touches the first peg.
  • The evaluator should stop the stopwatch once the last peg is in the container.


Scoring:

  • The number of seconds it takes for the patient to complete the test.
  • Alternative scoring - the number of pegs placed in 50 or 100 seconds can be recorded. In this case, results are expressed as the number of pegs placed per second.


Example:

Evidence[edit | edit source]

Reliability[edit | edit source]

Test-retest Reliability:

Stroke:
(Chen et al, 2009, Acute and Chronic Stroke) [7]

  • Excellent test-retest reliability for entire group (ICC = 0.85)
  • Adequate test-retest reliability for individuals with hand spasticity (ICC = 0.64). Excellent test-retest reliability for individuals without hand spasticity (ICC = 0.86)


Parkinson's:

(Earhart et al, 2011) [8]

  • Excellent test retest reliability (ICC = 0.88 for dominant hand and ICC = 0.91 for nondominant hand)


Healthy Adults:

(Wang et al 2011; n = 305; mean age = 32 (26); age range = 3 - 85 years) [9]

  • Excellent test retest reliability (ICC = 0.95 for right hand, ICC = 0.92 for left hand)


Interrater/Intrarater Reliability:

Healthy Adults:

(Grice et al, 2003) [6]

  • Excellent interrater reliability for the right hand (r = 0.984) and the left hand (r = 0.993)


Stroke:

(Heller et al, 1987; n = 56; mean age = 72 (9.9) years; assessed < 3 months post-stroke, Acute Stroke) [5]

  • Adequate to excellent intrarater reliability (r = 0.68 to 0.99)
  • Excellent interrater reliability (r = 0.75 to 0.99)


Cerebral Palsy:

(Mendoza-Sánchez et al, 2022)[10]

  • Excellent intra-rater inter-session reliability in patients with spastic unilateral CP

Validity[edit | edit source]

Criterion Validity:

Stroke:
(Sunderland et al, 1989; n = 38; mean age = 67, Acute Stroke) [11]

  • Poor concurrent validity with Frenchay Arm Test: 27% of cases incorrectly classified
  • Poor predictive validity: NHPT administered at 1 month did not predict functional outcomes at 6 months post stroke


Healthy Adults:
(Wang et al, 2011) [9]

  • Adequate correlation with the Purdue Pegboard test (p = -0.74 to -0.75)
  • Excellent correlation with the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency (p = -0.87 to -0.89)


Myotonic Dystrophy:

(Cutelle et al, 2018)[12]

  • Found to be a reliable, valid and sensitive test of dexterity in Myotonic Dystrophy Type 1.

Construct Validity: 

Stroke:
(Parker et al, 1986; 2 weeks, 3 & 6 months post onset, Acute Stroke) [13]

  • Excellent convergent validity with Motricity Index (r = 0.82)


Healthy children:

(Smith, Hong and Presson, 2000)[14]

  • Adequate concurrent validity for screening fine motor dexterity of school-age children.

Responsiveness[edit | edit source]

Stroke:

(Beebe and Lang, 2009, Acute Stroke) [15]

Responsiveness:
1–3 months 1–6 months
Grip 0.50 0.65
Pinch 0.52 0.56
ARAT 0.55 0.63
9HPT 0.52 0.66
SIS-Hand 1.02 0.86

Responsiveness was calculated using the single population effect size method. Values closer to 1.00 = more responsive to change. Low responsiveness < 0.20; moderate responsiveness < 0.50, and high responsiveness < 0.80

References[edit | edit source]

  1. Stroke Engine. Nine Hole Peg Test. Available from: http://strokengine.ca/en/assessments/nine-hole-peg-test-nhpt/ (Accessed 11/08/2022)
  2. 2.0 2.1 Shirley Ryan Ability Lab. Nine Hole Peg Test. Available from: https://www.sralab.org/rehabilitation-measures/nine-hole-peg-test (Accessed 11/08/2022)
  3. 3.0 3.1 Mathiowetz, V., Kashman, N., et al. "Grip and pinch strength: normative data for adults." Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1985 66(2): 69-74
  4. Sommerfeld, D. K., Eek, E. U., et al. "Spasticity after stroke: its occurrence and association with motor impairments and activity limitations." Stroke 2004 35(1): 134-139
  5. 5.0 5.1 Heller, A., Wade, D. T., et al. "Arm function after stroke: measurement and recovery over the first three months." Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry 1987 50(6): 714-719
  6. 6.0 6.1 Grice, K. O., Vogel, K. A., et al. "Adult norms for a commercially available Nine Hole Peg Test for finger dexterity." The American journal of occupational therapy 2003 57(5): 570-573
  7. Chen, H. M., Chen, C. C., et al. "Test-retest reproducibility and smallest real difference of 5 hand function tests in patients with stroke." Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2009 23(5): 435-440
  8. Earhart, G. M., Cavanaugh, J. T., et al. "The 9-hole PEG test of upper extremity function: average values, test-retest reliability, and factors contributing to performance in people with Parkinson disease." J Neurol Phys Ther 2011 35(4): 157-163
  9. 9.0 9.1 Wang, Y. C., Magasi, S. R., et al. "Assessing dexterity function: a comparison of two alternatives for the NIH Toolbox." Journal of Hand Therapy 2011 24(4): 313-320; quiz 321
  10. Mendoza-Sánchez S, Molina-Rueda F, Florencio LL, Carratalá-Tejada M, Cuesta-Gómez A. Reliability and agreement of the Nine Hole Peg Test in patients with unilateral spastic cerebral palsy. Eur J Pediatr. 2022 Jun;181(6):2283-2290.
  11. Sunderland, A., Tinson, D., et al. "Arm function after stroke. An evaluation of grip strength as a measure of recovery and a prognostic indicator." British Medical Journal 1989 52(11): 1267
  12. Cutellè C, Rastelli E, Gibellini M, Greco G, Frezza E, Botta A, Terracciano C, Massa R. Validation of the Nine Hole Peg Test as a measure of dexterity in myotonic dystrophy type 1. Neuromuscul Disord. 2018 Nov;28(11):947-951.
  13. Parker, V. M., Wade, D. T., et al. "Loss of arm function after stroke: measurement, frequency, and recovery." Int Rehabil Med 1986 8(2): 69-73
  14. Smith YA, Hong E, Presson C. Normative and validation studies of the Nine-hole Peg Test with children. Percept Mot Skills. 2000 Jun;90(3 Pt 1):823-43
  15. Beebe, J. A. and Lang, C. E. "Relationships and responsiveness of six upper extremity function tests during the first six months of recovery after stroke." J Neurol Phys Ther 2009 33(2): 96-103