Comment:

The ARAT is an observational test used to assess upper extremity function including its recovery after brain injury.

It was first described in 1981 by Lyle [1] as a modification of a previous test, the Upper Extremity Function Test (Carroll, 1965).

The test takes about ten minutes, requiring no special training. However, it requires a fairly complete set of equipment (wooden cubes of different sizes, balls, carafe and glass beads, tubes...).

There are 19 items divided into four subgroups: grasp, grip, pinch, and overall movements of the arm. The performance of each item is scored on a 4-point scale: 0 (no movement possible) to 3 (normal movement)

If the patient gets the maximum score on the first item (which is the most difficult) of a sub- group, he is automatically credited with the maximum score for all items of the subgroup (without need for stains).

If the score is less than 3, the second item is tested. The latter is the easiest sub -group, and if the patient has a score of 0, he will be automatically credited him the same score for the following items of the subgroup.

At least one item per subgroup is tested. [10].

The minimum score is 0, the maximum 57.

A test with 15 items has been proposed [5].

> Access to the scale is free

Psychometric properties:

General comment on reliability:

A review of the literature was performed [19] to examine the psychometric properties and clinical utility of various assessment tools of the upper limbs in people with motor disabilities of neurological origin in order to provide recommendations for practice. From a total of 31 tools identified, only two measures meet the psychometric properties and clinical utility criteria : the BBT and ARAT.
Sensitivity varies according to studies : quite low [16 ] thus the FMA and MSS (Motor Status Scale) would be better choices to assess functional improvement post AVC through rehabilitation using robotics on upper extremities, the two CAHAI scales (Chedoke Arm and Hand Activity Inventory) also have a higher sensitivity to change than the ARAT [7], moderate [13] or good [12], [8] in the first weeks and months after stroke, and are more sensitive to change than the FMA in post - stroke patients in chronic phase [3], or even higher [17].
This is a one-dimensional tool with a very good internal consistency [5, 15, 18]. However, 2 tasks: "place your hand behind the head " and "put your hand on the head" are not adequate because of bias (varies according to age) [18].
Very good inter-judge reproducibility [2, 4, 6, 11, 13] and intra- judge [4, 11, 15], high test -retest reliability [6].
Highly significant and good concurrent validity correlations, compared to WMFT [15], the FMA [6, 13] and BBT [6, 17]. Good constructed validity [12]. There is currently no discriminant validity between the ARAT and emotions, memory, communication, the GHQ- 30 (General Health Questionnaire) score and the socio -economic level [20]. Variable predictive validity: low [12], satisfactory [13], good [18].
The BBT and the ARAT seem more appropriate for evaluating dexterity than the Nine Hole Peg Test [14].
Compared to the ARAT, the burden of training and testing of WMFT is not offset by much higher psychometric benefits [21].
The minimal clinically important difference (MCID), that is to say the smallest change a patient or doctor considers important in a measure of clinical outcomes was evaluated according to studies at 12 points for the dominant hand [9] or 5.7 points [4].
Satisfactory MDC for the FMA and ARAT: usefulness of its two tests in the clinical setting [13].

Reference update:

To notify us of a missing reference, please use: contact@scale-library.com

More information:

References:

Inaugural references:

Psychometric references: