Dataset Information

Reliability and construct validity of the Duchenne Video Assessment.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

The Duchenne Video Assessment (DVA) assesses quality of movement as an indication of Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) disease severity. Caregivers video record patients performing home-based movement tasks using a mobile application, and physical therapists (PTs) rate the videos using scorecards with prespecified compensatory movement criteria. Reliability and construct validity of the DVA were tested using video and Pediatric Outcomes Data Collection Instrument (PODCI) data from patients with DMD and healthy controls from a separate study.

Methods

Fifteen PTs were trained and certified as DVA raters. All raters scored videos of five subjects performing each movement task; nine raters rescored the same videos four weeks later. Three raters scored videos from an average of 25 subjects for each movement task. Aggregate scores were used to test construct validity. An expert DMD clinician assigned each video to a severity group for known-groups analyses. Differences between rater scores across severity groups were tested and correlations between DVA and PODCI scores were calculated.

Results

Inter-rater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]) between all 15 raters ranged from 0.70 to 0.97 for all movement tasks. Mean intra-rater reliability ICC for nine raters ranged from 0.82 to 0.98 for all movement tasks. There were statistically significant differences between known severity groups for all movement tasks. The DVA correlated strongly with related PODCI constructs of physical function and weakly with unrelated constructs.

Discussion

The DVA was found to be a reliable and valid tool for measuring quality of movement as an indication of disease severity.

SUBMITTER: Contesse MG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8361683 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCurrently, there are no outcome measures assessing the ability of people with non-specific low back pain to self-manage their illness. Inspired by the 'Patient Enablement Instrument', we developed the Patient Enablement Instrument for Back Pain (PEI-BP). The aim of this study was to describe the development of the Patient Enablement Instrument for Back Pain (PEI-BP) and investigate content validity, construct validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, measurement error, responsiveness and floor and ceiling effects.MethodsThe PEI-BP consists of 6 items that are rated on a 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale. Measurement properties were evaluated using the COSMIN taxonomy and were based on three cohorts from primary care with low back pain: The content validity cohort (N = 14) which participated in semi-structured interviews, the GLA:D® Back cohort (N = 272) and the test-retest cohort (N = 37) which both completed self-reported questionnaires. For construct validity and responsiveness, enablement was compared to disability (Oswestry Disability Index), back pain beliefs (Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire), fear avoidance (Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire-physical activity), mental health (SF-36), educational level and number of previous episodes of low back pain.ResultsThe PEI-BP was found to have acceptable content validity, construct validity, reliability (internal consistency, test-retest reliability and measurement error) and responsiveness. The Smallest Detectable Change was 10.1 points illustrating that a patient would have to change more than 1/6 of the scale range for it to be a true change. A skewed distribution towards the high scores were found at baseline indicating a potentially problematic ceiling effect in the current population.ConclusionsThe PEI-BP can be considered a valid and reliable tool to measure enablement on people seeking care for non-specific LBP. Further testing of the PEI-BP in populations with more severe LBP is recommended.Trial registrationNot applicable.

Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of the present study was to investigate the construct validity, responsiveness and reliability of the Feline Grimace Scale (FGS) in kittens.MethodsA total of 36 healthy female kittens (aged 10 weeks to 6 months) were included in a prospective, randomized, blinded study. Video recordings of all kittens were made before and 1 and 2 h after ovariohysterectomy using an opioid-free injectable anesthetic protocol with or without multimodal analgesia. Additional recordings were taken before and 1 h after administration of rescue analgesia (buprenorphine 0.02 mg/kg IM) to painful kittens. Screenshots of facial images were collected from the video recordings for FGS scoring. Four observers blinded to treatment groups and time points scored 111 randomized images twice with a 5-week interval using the FGS. Five action units (AUs) were scored (ear position, orbital tightening, muzzle tension, whiskers position and head position; 0-2 each). Construct validity, responsiveness, and inter- and intra-rater reliability were evaluated using linear models with Benjamini-Hochberg correction, Wilcoxon signed-rank test and single intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCsingle), respectively (P <0.05).ResultsFGS total ratio scores were higher at 1 and 2 h after ovariohysterectomy (median [interquartile range, IQR]: 0.30 [0.20-0.40] and 0.30 [0.20-0.40], respectively) than at baseline (median [IQR]: 0.10 [0.00-0.30]) (P <0.001). FGS total ratio scores were lower after the administration of rescue analgesia (median [IQR] before and after rescue analgesia) 0.40 [0.20-0.50] and 0.20 [0.10-0.38], respectively (P <0.001). Inter-rater ICCsingle was 0.68 for the FGS total ratio scores and 0.35-0.70 for all AUs considered individually. Intra-rater ICCsingle was 0.77-0.91 for the FGS total ratio scores and 0.55-1.00 for all AUs considered individually.Conclusions and relevanceThe FGS is a valid and responsive acute pain-scoring instrument with moderate inter-rater reliability and good to excellent intra-rater reliability in kittens.