Using a template to improve the accuracy and efficiency of the Jebsen-Taylor hand function test: a comparative study.

D Harte, D Curran, Philip Hamill, Alison Porter-Armstrong, L Wilson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Introduction: The Jebsen–Taylor Hand Function Test is a standardised assessment that relies upon precise test administrationthrough the placement of a number of small items in each subset. This set up has been criticised in the literatureas being time consuming and open to non-precision error in item placement. This study investigates whether applicationof a novel template board to the testing procedure of the Jebsen–Taylor Hand Function Test enhances accuracy andreduces the clinical time taken to administer the test when compared to non-template-based testing practices.Methods: The template board was marked to highlight where each test item should precisely be located during subtestadministration. Additionally, three therapists completed 10 timed trials each in test preparation and setting up subtests 2,3, 6 and 7 with and without the template to assess efficiency.Results: Results show that set up without using a template resulted in an average total of 10% accuracy in subtest 2, 0%accuracy in subtest 3 and 3.33% accuracy in subtests 6 and 7. The acceptable value on these tests to demonstrateaccuracy is 100% (p
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)11-16
JournalJournal of Hand Therapy
Volume19
Issue number1
Early online date12 Feb 2014
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Mar 2014

Bibliographical note

Reference text: 1. MacDermid J and Michlovitz S. Incorporating outcome
measures into evidence-based practice. In: Law M and
MacDermid J (eds) Evidence based rehabilitation: a
guide to practice, 2nd edn. Thorofare, NJ: SLACK Inc,
2008, pp.63–94.
2. Badalamente M, Coffelt L, Elfar J, et al. Measurement
scales in clinical research of the upper extremity, part 1:
general principles, measures of general health, pain, and
patient satisfaction. J Hand Surg 2013; 38A: 401–406.
3. Mulligan S and Neistadt ME. Standardized assessment
tools. In: Mulligan S and Neistadt (eds) Occupational
therapy evaluation for children: a pocket guide.
Philadelphia/Baltimore: Lippincott Williams and
Wilkins, 2003, pp.151–197.
4. Jebsen RH, Taylor N, Trieschmann RB, et al. An objective
and standardized test of hand function. Arch Phys
Med Rehabil 1969; 50: 311–319.
5. Taylor N, Sand PL and Jebsen RH. Evaluation of hand
function in children. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1973; 54:
129–135.
6. Hackel ME, Wolfe GA, Bang SM, et al. Changes in hand
function in the aging adult as determined by the Jebsen
Taylor test of hand function. Phys Ther 1992; 72:
373–377.
7. Sears ED and Chung KC. Validity and responsiveness of
the Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test. J Hand Surg
2010; 35: 30–37.
8. Agnew P and Maas F. An interim Australian version of
the Jebsen test of hand function. Aust J Physiother 1982;
28: 23–29.
9. Bovend’Eerdt TJH, Dawes H, Johansen-Berg H, et al.
Evaluation of the modified Jebsen-Taylor Hand
Function and the University of Maryland Arm
Questionnaire for stroke. Clin Rehabil 2004; 18: 195–202.
10. Schoneveld K, Wittink H and Takken T. Clinimetric
evaluation of measurement tools used in hand therapy
to assess activity and participation. J Hand Ther 2009;
22: 221–236.
11. Prabhu K, Babu S, Samuel S, et al. Rapid opening and
closing of the hand as a measure of early neurologic
recovery in the upper extremity after surgery for cervical
spodylotic myelopathy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005; 86:
105–108.
12. Poole JL. Measures of hand function. Arth Care Res
2011; 63: 189–199.
13. Whiting S, Lincoln NB, Bhavani G, et al. Rivermead
perceptual assessment battery. Occup Ther Health Care
1986; 3: 209–210.
14. Rider B and Linden C. Comparison of standardized and
non-standardized administration of the Jebsen Hand
Function Test. J Hand Ther 1988; 2: 121–123.
15. Fitts PM. The information capacity of the human motor
system in controlling the amplitude of movement.
J Exper Psychol 1954; 47: 381–391.
16. Chung KC, Pillsbury MS, Walters MR, et al. Reliability
and validity testing of the Michigan Hand Outcomes
Questionnaire. J Hand Surg 1998; 23: 575–587.
17. Chung KC, Hamill JB, Walters MR, et al. The Michigan
Hand Outcomes Questionnaire (MHQ): assessment of
responsiveness to clinical change. Ann Plast Surg 1999;
42: 619–622.
18. Sandi SJ, Spaulding MS, McPherson JJ, et al. Jebsen
Hand Function Test: performance of the uninvolved
hand in hemiplegia and of right-handed, right and left
hemiplegia persons. Arch Phys Rehabil 1988; 69: 419–422.
19. Lynch KB and Bridle MJ. Validity of the Jebsen-Taylor
Hand Function Test in predicting activities of daily
living. Occup Ther J Res 1989; 9: 316–318.
20. Sharma S, Schumacher HR and McLellan AT.
Evaluation of the Jebsen Taylor Hand Function Test
for use in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arth Care
Res 1994; 7: 16–19.
21. Stern EB. Stability of the Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function
Test across three test sessions. Am J Occup Ther 1992; 46:
647–649.
16 Hand Therapy 19(1)
Downloaded from

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Using a template to improve the accuracy and efficiency of the Jebsen-Taylor hand function test: a comparative study.'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this