Velocity dependent measure of spasticity: Reliability in children and juveniles with neuromotor disorders.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to create a clear, standardized test description to rate spasticity severity into four categories according to the definition given by Lance [1], referred to as the Velocity Dependent Measure of Spasticity (VDMS). METHOD: Muscle groups of the upper and lower limbs of children with neuromotor disorders were evaluated on their response to passive movement in a fast-versus slow-velocity test condition. The interrater and test-retest reliability were assessed using Gwet's alpha one (95%-CI) and the percentage agreement. RESULTS: Two physiotherapists independently assessed 45 children and youths (age 4-19 years). The interrater reliability of the VDMS was substantial to almost perfect (Gwet's alpha one: 0.66-0.99, n= 45) while the test-retest reliability was almost perfect as well (Gwet's alpha one: 0.83-1.00, n= 42). CONCLUSION: The VDMS can be recommended as a reliable assessment with a standardized procedure to assess spasticity of the extremities in children with neuromotor disorders.

Hypertonia Assessment Tool.

The Hypertonia Assessment Tool is a 7-item instrument that discriminates spasticity, dystonia, and rigidity on 3 levels: item scores, subtype, and hypertonia diagnosis for each extremity. We quantified the inter- and intrarater reliability using Kappa statistics, Gwet's first-order agreement coefficient (both with 95% confidence interval), and percentage agreement for all levels. For validity, we compared the Hypertonia Assessment Tool subtype with the clinical diagnosis provided by the physicians. Two physiotherapists tested 45 children with neuromotor disorders. The interrater reliability (n = 45) of the Hypertonia Assessment Tool subtype was moderate to substantial whereas the intrarater reliability (n = 42) was almost perfect. The Hypertonia Assessment Tool showed good agreement in detecting spasticity. On the contrary, there was a higher presence of dystonia of 24% to 25% tested with the Hypertonia Assessment Tool compared to the clinical diagnosis. Even some individual items showed lower agreement between raters; the Hypertonia Assessment Tool subtypes and diagnosis were reliable. Validity of the Hypertonia Assessment Tool to test spasticity is confirmed, whereas, for dystonia and rigidity, further studies are needed.