The Wheelchair Skills Test: a pilot study of a new outcome measure.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the practicality, safety, reliability, validity, and usefulness of a new Wheelchair Skills Test (WST). DESIGN A pilot study with within-subject comparisons. SETTING Rehabilitation center. PATIENTS Twenty-four wheelchair users (11 with amputations, 4 with stroke, 3 with musculoskeletal disorders, 3 with spinal cord injury, 3 with neuromuscular disorders). INTERVENTION The WST. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Subjects were videotaped while performing 33 skills twice (>10d apart). Their ability to perform each skill was rated on a 3-point ordinal scale. The test-retest, intra-, and interrater reliabilities were determined. Each subject's occupational therapist completed a visual analog scale (VAS), reflecting a global rating of the subject's manual wheelchair skills. We assessed validity by evaluating whether the WST detected expected changes (construct validity) and how well the total WST scores correlated with the occupational therapists' global ratings (concurrent validity). Each occupational therapist also used a VAS to quantify the usefulness of the WST. RESULTS The mean time required to administer the WST was 29 minutes. There were no adverse incidents. For the test-retest, intra-, and interrater reliabilities, the correlations for the total scores were .65 (P =.001), .96 (P <.001), and .95 (P <.001), respectively. The 9 therapists unanimously endorsed 30 (91%) of the 33 WST skills. The correlation between the mean changes in the WST and global rating scores was .45 (P <.05). There was a slight negative relationship between total WST score and age (P <.05). There were no significant differences related to the diagnoses accounting for wheelchair use. Wheelchair users with more than 3 weeks of experience with their wheelchairs scored higher than those with less experience (P =.0085). The correlations between the WST and global rating scores ranged from .40 to .54 (P <.05). Through Rasch analysis, we eliminated 6 skills, with the remaining skills comprising a unidimensional screening test of wheelchair ability. The mean VAS score for perceived usefulness was 59%. CONCLUSIONS The WST is practical, safe, well tolerated, exhibits good to excellent reliability, excellent content validity, fair construct and concurrent validity, and moderate usefulness. This pilot study makes an important contribution toward meeting the need for a well-validated outcome measure of manual wheelchair ability.

[1]  G A Wolfe,et al.  Influence of floor surface on the energy cost of wheelchair propulsion. , 1977, Physical therapy.

[2]  C. Butler,et al.  Motorized wheelchair driving by disabled children. , 1984, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[3]  Brubaker Ce,et al.  Effects of side slope on wheelchair performance. , 1986 .

[4]  Promoting Wheelchair Accessibility of Private Business Settings , 1986 .

[5]  G. Guyatt,et al.  A comparison of Likert and visual analogue scales for measuring change in function. , 1987, Journal of chronic diseases.

[6]  S. Wood-Dauphinée,et al.  Assessment of global function: The Reintegration to Normal Living Index. , 1988, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[7]  G Cottam,et al.  Wheelchair obstacle course performance in right cerebral vascular accident victims. , 1989, Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology.

[8]  The architectural accessibility of urban facilities to the disabled: a summary of descriptive survey results , 1989, Paraplegia.

[9]  Enders.  Assistive Technology Sourcebook , 1991 .

[10]  R L Burgdorf.  Equal access to public accommodations. , 1991, The Milbank quarterly.

[11]  D Anson,et al.  Pediatric power wheelchairs: evaluation of function in the home and school environments. , 1991, Assistive technology : the official journal of RESNA.

[12]  I Canale,et al.  Ramp length/grade prescriptions for wheelchair dependent individuals , 1991, Paraplegia.

[13]  A Cappozzo,et al.  Prediction of ramp traversability for wheelchair dependent individuals , 1991, Paraplegia.

[14]  R T Tranter,et al.  Barriers to mobility: physically‐disabled and frail elderly people in their local outdoor environment , 1991, International journal of rehabilitation research. Internationale Zeitschrift fur Rehabilitationsforschung. Revue internationale de recherches de readaptation.

[15]  Ramps Not Steps: A Study of Accessibility Preferences , 1992 .

[16]  Denise Chesney,et al.  A Guide to Wheelchair Selection: How to Use the Ansi/Resna Wheelchair Standards to Buy a Wheelchair , 1994 .

[17]  L. Rapport,et al.  Rightward orienting bias, wheelchair maneuvering, and fall risk. , 1995, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[18]  J A Sanford,et al.  People with mobility impairments in the United States today and in 2010. , 1996, Assistive technology : the official journal of RESNA.

[19]  M F Story,et al.  An analysis of the effects of ramp slope on people with mobility impairments. , 1997, Assistive technology : the official journal of RESNA.

[20]  C. Granger,et al.  A brief outpatient functional assessment measure: validity using Rasch measures. , 1997, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[21]  S Sprigle,et al.  Physical accessibility guidelines of consumer product controls. , 1997, Assistive technology : the official journal of RESNA.

[22]  R. B. Lazar,et al.  Principles of Neurologic Rehabilitation , 1997 .

[23]  Rory A. Cooper.  Wheelchair Selection and Configuration , 1998 .

[24]  Linda McClain,et al.  Wheelchair Accessibility—Living the Experience: Function in the Community , 1998 .

[25]  Lisa A Harvey,et al.  Reliability of a tool for assessing mobility in wheelchair-dependent paraplegics , 1998, Spinal Cord.

[26]  J. Thonnard,et al.  ABILHAND: a Rasch-built measure of manual ability. , 1998, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[27]  K M Means,et al.  Obstacle course performance and risk of falling in community-dwelling elderly persons. , 1998, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[28]  L L Pierce,et al.  Barriers to access: frustrations of people who use a wheelchair for full-time mobility. , 1998, Rehabilitation nursing : the official journal of the Association of Rehabilitation Nurses.

[29]  Barriers Experienced by Nondisabled Wheelchair Users: A University-Based Occupational Therapy Program Educational Exercise , 1999 .

[30]  C. Granger,et al.  Status of functional outcomes for stroke survivors. , 1999, Physical medicine and rehabilitation clinics of North America.

[31]  R L Kirby,et al.  Clinical measurement of the static rear stability of occupied wheelchairs. , 1999, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[32]  R L Kirby,et al.  Spotter strap for the prevention of wheelchair tipping. , 1999, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[33]  L. Tesio,et al.  Short form of the Dizziness Handicap Inventory: construction and validation through Rasch analysis. , 1999, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[34]  S. D. Shimada,et al.  Wheelchair pushrim kinetics: body weight and median nerve function. , 1999, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[35]  R L Kirby,et al.  Wheelchair propulsion: descriptive comparison of hemiplegic and two-hand patterns during selected activities. , 1999, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[36]  T. Tsuji,et al.  ADL structure for nondisabled Japanese children based on the Functional Independence Measure for Children (WeeFIM). , 1999, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[37]  Debbie Field,et al.  Powered Mobility: A Literature Review Illustrating the Importance of a Multifaceted Approach , 1999 .

[38]  R L Kirby,et al.  New wheelie aid for wheelchairs: controlled trial of safety and efficacy. , 2001, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.