Utrecht Pediatric Wheelchair Mobility Skills Test: Reliability, Validity, and Responsiveness in Youths Using a Manual Wheelchair

• Published in: Physical therapy Vol. 99; no. 8; pp. 1098 - 1106
• Main Authors: Sol, Marleen E, de Groot, Janke F, Zwinkels, Maremka, Visser-Meily, J M Anne, Kruitwagen, Cas L J J, Verschuren, Olaf
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Oxford University Press 01.08.2019
• Subjects: Adolescent; Ambulation aids; Analysis; Child; Children; Cross-Sectional Studies; Disability Evaluation; Female; Humans; Male; Pediatrics; Psychometrics; Reproducibility of Results; Teenagers; Training; Validation studies; Validity; Wheelchairs; Wheelchairs - standards; Youth
• ISSN: 0031-9023; 1538-6724
• DOI: 10.1093/ptj/pzz061

Abstract Background The assessment of wheelchair mobility skills (WMS) in youths using a manual wheelchair is important. More information is needed regarding the psychometric properties of the newly developed Utrecht Pediatric Wheelchair Mobility Skills Test (UP-WMST). Objective The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability, content validity, construct validity, and responsiveness of the UP-WMST 2.0 in youths using a manual wheelchair. Design This was a repeated-measurements, cross-sectional study. Methods A total of 117 children and adolescents who use a manual wheelchair participated in this study. The UP-WMST 2.0 contains the same 15 WMS items as the original UP-WMST but has an adaptation of the scoring method. Test-retest reliability was estimated in 30 participants. Content validity was assessed through floor and ceiling effect analyses. Construct validity was assessed through hypothesis testing. Preliminary estimates of responsiveness were assessed in 23 participants who participated in a WMS training program. Results Test-retest reliability analysis showed weighted Cohen kappa coefficients ranging from 0.63 to 0.98 for all but 1 item. The total UP-WMST 2.0 score had an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.97. No floor or ceiling effects were detected. Independent-sample t test analysis confirmed our hypotheses regarding direction and difference in scores between age and diagnostic groups. Within-group analysis in the responsiveness study showed a positive significant change in UP-WMST 2.0 score (8.3 points). Limitations The small sample size used in the responsiveness study was a limitation of this study. Conclusions This study provided evidence of the test-retest reliability, content, and construct validity of the UP-WMST 2.0. It also provided initial evidence of the responsiveness of the UP-WMST 2.0 for measuring change in WMS in youths using a manual wheelchair.