The Rivermead Assessment of Somatosensory Performance (RASP): standardization and reliability data

Objective: To develop a standardized, clinically relevant, quantitative assessment of somatosensory performance in patients with stroke. Design: Prospective observational study and test evaluation. Setting: Local Oxford hospitals and a regional neurological rehabilitation centre. Subjects: Stroke patients with a ”rst, lateralized acute stroke in hospital, and age-matched control subjects. Method: Each patient was assessed in a structured way using a new battery of formal tests of somatosensory performance. Results: A total of 100 patients and 50 controls were fully investigated. Control subjects performed at or near ceiling on all tests, but patients showed impaired performance on all tests. The Rivermead Assessment of Somatosensory Performance (RASP) showed good intra-rater and inter-rater reliability for all subtests. There were however only weak relationships between scores of sensory impairment and scores of motor impairment or mobility and dependence. Conclusions: The RASP provides a practical and reliable assessment of sensory loss, which provides the clinician with a comprehensive picture of the patient’s performance and can be used to inform and monitor rehabilitation and recovery.

[1]  D. Barer.  The influence of visual and tactile inattention on predictions for recovery from acute stroke. , 1990, The Quarterly journal of medicine.

[2]  Oreon K. Timm,et al.  REHABILITATION—TO WHAT? * , 1967 .

[3]  Leeanne M. Carey,et al.  Somatosensory Loss after Stroke , 1995 .

[4]  K. Leo,et al.  Relationship between perception of joint position sense and limb synergies in patients with hemiplegia. , 1981, Physical therapy.

[5]  M. Dombovy,et al.  Rehabilitation for stroke: a review. , 1986, Stroke.

[6]  Robert C. Wolpert,et al.  A Review of the , 1985 .

[7]  M Yekutiel,et al.  A controlled trial of the retraining of the sensory function of the hand in stroke patients. , 1993, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[8]  P. Halligan,et al.  Current practice and clinical relevance of somatosensory assessment after stroke , 1999, Clinical rehabilitation.

[9]  Nadina B. Lincoln,et al.  Reliability and Revision of the Nottingham Sensory Assessment for Stroke Patients , 1998 .

[10]  L. Carey,et al.  Sensory loss in stroke patients: effective training of tactile and proprioceptive discrimination. , 1993, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[11]  M. F. Nolan,et al.  Two-point discrimination assessment in the upper limb in young adult men and women. , 1982, Physical therapy.

[12]  P E Roland,et al.  Astereognosis. Tactile discrimination after localized hemispheric lesions in man. , 1976, Archives of neurology.

[13]  Nadina B. Lincoln,et al.  The unreliability of sensory assessments , 1991 .

[14]  G. Demeurisse,et al.  Motor evaluation in vascular hemiplegia. , 1980, European neurology.

[15]  D. Wade,et al.  The Barthel ADL Index: a standard measure of physical disability? , 1988, International disability studies.

[16]  L. Jones,et al.  The assessment and treatment of patients who have sensory loss following cortical lesions. , 1993, Journal of hand therapy : official journal of the American Society of Hand Therapists.

[17]  A L Dellon,et al.  Reliability of two-point discrimination measurements. , 1987, The Journal of hand surgery.

[18]  N. Lincoln,et al.  Assessment of motor function in stroke patients. , 1979, Physiotherapy.

[19]  M Robinson,et al.  Factors Influencing Stroke Rehabilitation , 1971, Stroke.