TY - JOUR
T1 - Outcome measures in neurological physical therapy practice
T2 - Part II. A patient-centered process
AU - Sullivan, Jane E
AU - Andrews, A. Williams
AU - Lanzino, Desiree
AU - Peron, Aimee
AU - Potter, Kirsten A.
PY - 2011/6/1
Y1 - 2011/6/1
N2 - Physical therapists working in neurological practice must make choices about which standardized outcome measures are most appropriate for each patient. Significant time constraints in the clinic limit the number of measures that one can reasonably administer. Therapists must choose measures that will provide results that guide the selection of appropriate interventions and are likely to show clinically meaningful change. Therefore, therapists must be able to compare the merits of available measures to identify those that are most relevant for each patient and setting. This article describes a process for selecting outcome measures and illustrates the use of that process with a patient who has had a stroke. The link between selecting objective outcome measures and tracking patient progress is emphasized. Comparisons are made between 2 motor function measures (the Fugl-Meyer Assessment [FMA] of Physical Performance vs the Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement), and 2 balance measures (Berg Balance Scale vs the Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale). The use of objective outcome measures allows therapists to quantify information that previously had been described in subjective terms. This allows the tracking of progress, and the comparison of effectiveness and costs across interventions, settings, providers, and patient characteristics.
AB - Physical therapists working in neurological practice must make choices about which standardized outcome measures are most appropriate for each patient. Significant time constraints in the clinic limit the number of measures that one can reasonably administer. Therapists must choose measures that will provide results that guide the selection of appropriate interventions and are likely to show clinically meaningful change. Therefore, therapists must be able to compare the merits of available measures to identify those that are most relevant for each patient and setting. This article describes a process for selecting outcome measures and illustrates the use of that process with a patient who has had a stroke. The link between selecting objective outcome measures and tracking patient progress is emphasized. Comparisons are made between 2 motor function measures (the Fugl-Meyer Assessment [FMA] of Physical Performance vs the Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement), and 2 balance measures (Berg Balance Scale vs the Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale). The use of objective outcome measures allows therapists to quantify information that previously had been described in subjective terms. This allows the tracking of progress, and the comparison of effectiveness and costs across interventions, settings, providers, and patient characteristics.
KW - examination
KW - outcome measures therapy
KW - stroke
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79958066845&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79958066845&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/NPT.0b013e31821a24eb
DO - 10.1097/NPT.0b013e31821a24eb
M3 - Article
C2 - 21934361
AN - SCOPUS:79958066845
SN - 1557-0576
VL - 35
SP - 65
EP - 74
JO - Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy
JF - Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy
IS - 2
ER -