4.4 Article

A New Scale to Evaluate Motor Function in Rett Syndrome: Validation and Psychometric Properties

Journal

PEDIATRIC NEUROLOGY
Volume 100, Issue -, Pages 80-86

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2019.03.005

Keywords

Rett syndrome; Motor function; Validity; Reliability; Latent class analysis; Confirmatory factor analysis

Funding

  1. Italian Ministry of Health
  2. AIRETT
  3. Pierfranco and Luisa Mariani Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: We aim to describe and psychometrically validate the Rett Syndrome Motor Evaluation Scale, a 25-item ordinal scale examining (loco-)motor function across six sections: standing, sitting, transitions, walking, running, and walking up or downstairs. Methods: We illustrate the process of item construction and validation, report findings and normative data obtained on a standardization sample of 60 patients with Rett syndrome. We investigate the validity and reliability of the scale and illustrate its psychometric properties using modern multivariate techniques of data analysis. Results: Sixty patients with Rett syndrome were included (all female; mean age 12.45 (S.D. 8.75) years). The multidimensional latent structure of the scale was supported by the results of the confirmatory factor analysis. Rett Syndrome Motor Evaluation Scale showed strong internal consistency reliability as well as excellent inter-rater agreement. The Rett Syndrome Motor Evaluation Scale scores were not predicted by age, but were associated with disease severity, degree of spasticity, and hand dysfunction. We also identified three latent classes with different degrees of impairment. Conclusions: Rett Syndrome Motor Evaluation Scale is a new, valid, and reliable scale that can be introduced in clinical practice when assessing (loco-)motor function in Rett syndrome. (C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available