Modified Ashworth Scale: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
== Reference == | == Reference == | ||
Studies that have investigated the reliability of the modified Ashworth Scale as measures of spasticity<ref>Ad P, Johnson GR. Price CiM, Curless RH, Barnes MP, Rodgers H. A review of the properties and limitations of the Ashworth and modified Ashworth Scales as measures of spasticity. Clin Rehabil. 1999;13(5):373-83.</ref> | Studies that have investigated the reliability of the modified Ashworth Scale as measures of spasticity<ref name=":0">Ad P, Johnson GR. Price CiM, Curless RH, Barnes MP, Rodgers H. A review of the properties and limitations of the Ashworth and modified Ashworth Scales as measures of spasticity. Clin Rehabil. 1999;13(5):373-83.</ref> | ||
{| class="wikitable" | {| class="wikitable" | ||
!Reference | !Reference | ||
| Line 68: | Line 68: | ||
=== Validity === | === Validity === | ||
<u>Criterion Validity</u> | |||
Sköld et al. 35 have shown good correlations between the modified Ashworth scores and EMG parameters derived from simultaneous surface EMG recordings from the muscles tested, | |||
* it is not possible to draw unequivocal support for the modified Ashworth score being a valid and ordinal measure of spasticity due to one key methodological inconsistency. | |||
* The actual time to grade spasticity (by passively moving the limb) was reported to be between 0.25 and 0.33 s, however, many of the derived EMG parameters were poorly referenced to this time window<ref name=":0" /> | |||
<u>Construct Validity:</u> | |||
Bohannon and Smith (1987)13 modified the original scale by adding an additional category, a 1+ falling between 1 and 2, with the aim of increasing its sensitivity. Both scales have since been used as measures of spasticity for clinical and research purposes. A clinical rating of spasticity on the Ashworth Scales is made after an assessor tests the resistance to passive movement about a joint.Both scales describe the resistance perceived while moving a joint through its full range of movement – except in grade ‘4 | |||
<u>Content Validity:</u> | |||
The Ashworth Scale was initially developed as a simple clinical tool to test the efficacy of an anti-spastic drug in patients with multiple sclerosis, Ashworth Scales are measures of spasticity | |||
=== Responsiveness === | === Responsiveness === | ||
Revision as of 11:47, 31 October 2020
Original Editor - User Name
Top Contributors - Habibu Salisu Badamasi and Shreya Pavaskar
Objective[edit | edit source]
Modified Ashworth Scale (MAS) are used to assess spasticity.[1]
Intended Population[edit | edit source]
MAS have been utilized in the following populations: stroke, spinal cord injury, multiple sclerosis, cerebral palsy, traumatic brain injury, pediatric hypertonia, and central nervous system lesions[2]
Method of Use[edit | edit source]
Description
its performed by extending the patients limb first from a position of maximal possible flexion to maximal possible extension ( the point at which the first soft resistance is met). Afterwards,the modified Ashworth scale is assessed while
moving from extension to flexion[3]
scoring
0 No increase in tone
1 slight increase in tone giving a catch when slight increase in muscle tone, manifested by the limb was moved in flexion or extension.
1+ slight increase in muscle tone, manifested by a catch followed by minimal resistance throughout (ROM )
2 more marked increase in tone but more marked increased in muscle tone through most limb easily flexed
3 considerable increase in tone, passive movement difficult
4 limb rigid in flexion or extension
Reference[edit | edit source]
Studies that have investigated the reliability of the modified Ashworth Scale as measures of spasticity[4]
| Reference | Study details | Relevant results |
|---|---|---|
| Bohannon and Smith (1987)13 | Inter-rater reliability of the MAS. Muscles tested: elbow flexors in the impaired arm. Ns = 30 [MS (1), HI (5), CVA (24) ] Na = 2 [physiotherapist] The assessors independently assessed each subject once | 86.7% agreement between assessors (Kendall’s τ = 0.847; p <0.001) Cohen’s κ was calculated as 0.826a |
| Bodin and Morris (1991)48 | Inter-rater reliability of the MAS. Muscle tested: wrist flexors. Ns = 18 [CVA] Na = 2 [physiotherapist] The assessors independently assessed each subject under three different conditions (immediately after positioning, after a 90 s stretch of the flexors and after a 90 s stretch of the extensors). | 76% agreement between assessors (Kendall’s τ of 0.857) Cohen’s κ was calculated as 0.745a |
| Sloan et al. (1992)49 | Inter-rater reliability of the MAS. Muscles tested: elbow flexors and extensors, and knee flexors. Measurements taken bilaterally. Ns = 34 [hemiplegia] Na = 4 [physiotherapist (2), doctor (2) ] The assessors serially assessed each subject | Spearman’s ρ varied from 0.56 and 0.90 at the elbow and between 0.26 and 0.62 at the knee |
| Allison et al. (1996)50 | Inter- and Intra-rater reliability of the MAS. Muscles tested: ankle plantar flexors. Measurements were taken bilaterally. Day-1 of testing Ns = 30 [HI] Na = 2 [physiotherapist] Both testers assessed all subjects independently. Day-2 of testing Tester 1 assessed Ns = 21 subjects. | Day-1 Inter-rater reliability tester 1 and tester 2: 55% agreement (ρ = 0.727; τ = 0.647; κ = 0.397) Intra-rater reliability of tester 1: 53% agreement (ρ = 0.741; τ = 0.674; κ = 0.694) Intra-rater reliability of tester 2: 48% agreement (ρ = 0.550; τ = 0.478; κ = 0.286) Day-2 Intra-rater reliability of tester 1: 58% agreement (ρ = 0.821; τ = 0.739; κ 0.422) |
Evidence[edit | edit source]
Reliability[edit | edit source]
Interrater/Intrarater Reliability:
muscle tested; Elbow flexor and extensor and knee flexor in Hemiplegia patients
( Sloan et al. (1992)49 Measurements taken bilaterally. Ns = 34 [hemiplegia] Na = 4 [physiotherapist (2), doctor (2) ] The assessors serially assessed each subject)
- Spearman’s ρ varied from 0.56 and 0.90 at the elbow and between 0.26 and 0.62 at the knee
In daily practice the use of the Modified Ash-worth Scale procedure is quick and easy and is a common tool in the measurement of spasticity. Additionally,the Modified Ashworth Scale is widely used in research, In different patient groups such as stroke,multiple sclerosis and spinal cord injury, moderate to good intra-rater reliability and poor to moderate inter-rater reliability of the scale was found.[5]
Validity[edit | edit source]
Criterion Validity
Sköld et al. 35 have shown good correlations between the modified Ashworth scores and EMG parameters derived from simultaneous surface EMG recordings from the muscles tested,
- it is not possible to draw unequivocal support for the modified Ashworth score being a valid and ordinal measure of spasticity due to one key methodological inconsistency.
- The actual time to grade spasticity (by passively moving the limb) was reported to be between 0.25 and 0.33 s, however, many of the derived EMG parameters were poorly referenced to this time window[4]
Construct Validity:
Bohannon and Smith (1987)13 modified the original scale by adding an additional category, a 1+ falling between 1 and 2, with the aim of increasing its sensitivity. Both scales have since been used as measures of spasticity for clinical and research purposes. A clinical rating of spasticity on the Ashworth Scales is made after an assessor tests the resistance to passive movement about a joint.Both scales describe the resistance perceived while moving a joint through its full range of movement – except in grade ‘4
Content Validity:
The Ashworth Scale was initially developed as a simple clinical tool to test the efficacy of an anti-spastic drug in patients with multiple sclerosis, Ashworth Scales are measures of spasticity
Responsiveness[edit | edit source]
Miscellaneous[edit | edit source]
Links[edit | edit source]
References[edit | edit source]
- ↑ Charalambous CP. Interrater reliability of a modified Ashworth scale of muscle spasticity. InClassic papers in orthopaedics 2014 (pp. 415-417). Springer, London.
- ↑ Morris S. Ashworth and Tardieu Scales: Their clinical relevance for measuring spasticity in adult and paediatric neurological populations. Physical Therapy Reviews. 2002 Mar 1;7(1):53-62.
- ↑ Rw B, Smith MB. Interrater reliability of a modified Ashworth scale of muscle spasticity. Phys ther. 1987;67(2):206-7.
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 Ad P, Johnson GR. Price CiM, Curless RH, Barnes MP, Rodgers H. A review of the properties and limitations of the Ashworth and modified Ashworth Scales as measures of spasticity. Clin Rehabil. 1999;13(5):373-83.
- ↑ Mehrholz J, Wagner K, Meißner D, Grundmann K, Zange C, Koch R, Pohl M. Reliability of the Modified Tardieu Scale and the Modified Ashworth Scale in adult patients with severe brain injury: a comparison study. Clinical rehabilitation. 2005 Nov;19(7):751-9.
.
