Background. Literature regarding the ability of individuals who have a cerebrovascular accident (CVA) to perform activities of daily living (ADL) is inconclusive regarding the impact of gender, age or side of the lesion. Purpose. To determine if people with a CVA differ in their abilities to perform ADL tasks and actions as affected by their gender, age, and side of the lesion. Method. A descriptive comparison of 3878 people with a right or left CVA included in the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (AMPS) database. Results. People with stroke demonstrated statistically significant gender, age, and side of CVA differences in overall ADL ability. However, the gender and side of CVA differences were not clinically detectable. Increased age was associated with a gradual decline in ADL ability. Conclusion. Individuals with a right or left CVA have similar abilities when performing ADL tasks and actions. Practice Implications. These findings indicate that occupation-based intervention, which focuses on the utilization of intact ADL skills to compensate for ADL skill deficits (vs. the utilization of tests of body function), may be a more efficient and effective means of planning and implementing occupational therapy intervention for individuals with a stroke.
American Occupational Therapy Association. (1993). Position paper: Purposeful activity. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 47, 1081–1082.
2.
BernspångB., & FisherA.G. (1995a). Differences between persons with right or left CVA on the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 76, 1144–1151.
3.
BernspangB., & FisherA.G. (1995b). Validation of the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills for use in Sweden. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 2, 3–9.
ChaeJ., & ZorowitzR. (1998). Functional status of cortical and subcortical nonhemorrhagic stroke survivors and the effect of lesion laterality. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 77, 415–420.
6.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Erlbaum Associates: Hillsdale, N.J.
7.
CookeK.Z., FisherA.G., MayberryW., & OakleyF. (2000). Differences in activities of daily living process skills of persons with and without Alzheimer's disease. Occupational Therapy Journal of Research, 20, 87–104.
8.
DarraghA.R., SampleP.L., & FisherA.G. (1998). Environment effect on functional task performance in adults with acquired brain injuries: Use of the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 79, 418–423.
9.
DickersonA.E., & FisherA.G. (1993). Age differences in functional performance. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 47, 686–692.
10.
DuranL., & FisherA.G. (1996). Male and female performance on the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 77, 1019–1024.
11.
DuranL., & FisherA. G. (1999). Evaluation and intervention with executive functions impairment. In UnsworthC. (Ed.), Cognitive and perceptual dysfunction: A clinical reasoning approach to evaluation and intervention (pp. 209–255). Philadelphia: F. A. Davis.
12.
FalconerJ. A., NaughtonB. J., StrasserD. C., & SincoreJ. M. (1994). Stroke inpatient rehabilitation: A comparison across age groups. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 42, 39–44.
13.
FisherA.G. (1993). The assessment of IADL motor skills: An application of many-faceted Rasch analysis. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 47, 319–338.
14.
FisherA.G. (1994). Development of a functional assessment that adjusts ability measures for task simplicity and rater leniency. In WilsonM. (Ed.), Objective measurement: Theory into practice Vol. 2 (pp. 145–175). Norwood, NJ: Ablex
15.
FisherA.G. (1997). Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (2nd ed.). Fort Collins, CO: Three Star Press.
16.
FisherA. G. (2001a). Assessment of Motor and Process Skills: Development, standardization, and administration manual (4th ed.). Fort Collins, CO: Three Star Press.
17.
FisherA. G. (2001b). Assessment of Motor and Process Skills: User manual (4th ed.). Fort Collins, CO: Three Star Press.
18.
FisherA. G., LiuY., VelozoC. A., & PanA. W. (1992). Cross-cultural assessment of process skills. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 46, 876–885.
19.
GalskiT., BrunoR. L., ZorowitzR. & WalkerJ. (1993). Predicting length of stay, functional outcome, and aftercare in the rehabilitation of stroke patients — the dominant role of higher-order cognition. Stroke24, 1794–1800.
20.
GarrisonS., & RolakL. (1993). Rehabilitation of the stroke patient. In DeLisaJ. (Ed.), Rehabilitation Medicine: Principles and Practices, (2nd ed.). Philadelphia: JB Lippincott.
21.
GirardC., FisherA. G., ShortM. A., & DuranL. (1999). Occupational performance differences between psychiatric groups. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 6, 119–126.
22.
GlosserG., & GoodglassH. (1990). Disorders of executive control functions among aphasic and other brain-damaged patients. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 12, 485–501.
23.
GoldmanS.L., & FisherA.G. (1997). Cross-cultural validation of the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 60, 77–85.
24.
GotoS., FisherA.G., & MayberryW.L. (1996). AMPS applied cross-culturally to the Japanese. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 50, 798–806.
25.
GrangerC. V. (1986). Advances in functional assessment for medical rehabilitation. Topics in Geriatric Rehabilitation, 1, 59–74.
26.
HartmanM. L., FisherA. G., & DuranL. (1999). Assessment of functional ability of people with Alzheimer's disease. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 6, 111–118.
27.
HayaseD., MosenteenD. A., ThimmaiahD., ZemkeS., AtlerK., & FisherA. G. (2004). Age-related changes in activities of daily living (ADL) ability. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 51, 192–198.
28.
HeilmanK. M. (1993). Neglect and related disorders. In HeilmanK. M. & ValensteinE. (Eds.), Clinical neuropsychology (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
29.
HierD.B., MondlockJ., & CaplanL.R. (1983). Behavioral abnormalities after right hemisphere stroke. Neurology, 33, 337–344.
30.
JongbloedL. (1986). Prediction of function after stroke — A critical review. Stroke, 17, 765–776.
31.
KatzN., & Hartman-MaeirA. (1997). Occupational performance and metacognition. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 64, 53–62.
32.
KielhofnerG. (1995). A model of human occupation: Theory and application (2nd ed.). Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.
33.
KirkleyK. N., & FisherA. G. (1999). Alternate forms reliability of the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills. Journal of Objective Measurement, 3, 53–70.
34.
KottorpA., BernspångB., FisherA. G. (2003). Validity of a performance assessment of activities of daily living (ADL) for persons with developmental disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 47, 597–605.
35.
KwakkelG., WagnaarR. C., KollenB. J., & LankhorstG. J. (1996). Predicting disability in stroke — A critical review of the literature. Age and Ageing, 25, 479–489.
36.
LezakM. D. (1995). Neuropsychological assessment (3rd ed). Oxford University Press: New York.
37.
LinacreJ. M. (1987–2002). Facets for Windows Version No. 3.38.1. Chicago: MESA.
38.
LinacreJ. M. (1993). Many-facet Rasch measurement (2nd ed.). Chicago: MESA.
39.
MacciocchiS. N., DiamondP. T., AlvesW. M., & MertzT. (1998). Ischemic stroke: Relation of age, lesion location, and initial neurologic deficit to functional outcome. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 79, 1255–1257.
40.
MagalhãesL.C., FisherA.G., BernspångB., & LincareJ.M. (1996). Cross-cultural assessment of functional ability. Occupational Therapy Journal of Research, 16, 45–63.
41.
MahoneyF. I., & BarthelD. W. (1965). Functional evaluation: The Barthel Index. Maryland State Medical Journal, 14, 61–65.
42.
McNamaraT. (1996). Measuring second language performance. Addison Wesley Longman: New York.
43.
MerrittB. K., & FisherA. G. (2003). Gender differences in the performance of activities of daily living. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 84, 1872–1877.
NygårdL., BernspångB., FisherA.G., & WinbladB. (1994). Comparing motor and process ability of persons with suspected dementia in home and clinic settings. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 48, 689–696.
46.
OakleyF., DuranL., FisherA., & MerrittB. (2003). Differences in activities of daily living motor skills of persons with and without Alzheimer's disease. Australian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 50 (2), 72–78.
47.
OakleyF., & SunderlandT. (1997). The Assessment of Motor and Process Skills as a measure of IADL functioning in pharmacologic studies of people with Alzheimer's disease: A pilot study. International Psychogeriatrics, 9, 197–206.
ParkS., FisherA.G., & VelozoC.A. (1994). Using the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills to compare occupational performance between clinic and home settings. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 48, 697–709.
50.
ReinvangI., & SundetK.. (1985). The validity of functional assessment with neuropsychological tests in aphasic stroke patients. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 26, 208–218.
51.
RobinsonS. E., & FisherA. G. (1996). A study to examine the relationship of the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (AMPS) to other tests of cognition and function. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 59, 260–263.
52.
RobinsonS. E., & FisherA. G. (1999). Functional and cognitive differences between cognitively-well people and people with dementia. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 62, 466–471.
53.
RosenthalR. (1994). Parametric measures of effect size. In CooperH. & HedgesL. (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis (pp. 231–244). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
54.
RothE. J., HeinemannA. W., LovellL. L., HarveyR. L., McGuireJ. R., & DiazS. (1998). Impairment and disability: Their relation during stroke rehabilitation. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 79, 329–335.
55.
SchwartzM. F. (1995). Re-examining the role of executive functions in routine action production. In GrafmanJ., HolyoakK. J., & BollerF. (Eds.), Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (Structure and function of the human prefrontal cortex), (Vol 769, pp. 321–335). New York: New York Academy of Sciences.
56.
SchwartzM. F., MayerN. H., Fitzpatrick-DeSalmeE. J., & MontgomeryM. W. (1993). Cognitive theory and the study of everyday action disorders after brain damage. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 8, 59–72.
57.
Schwartz (1999). Naturalistic action production following right hemisphere stroke. Neuropsychologia, 37, 51–66.
58.
ShalliceT., & BurgessP. W. (1991). Deficits in strategy application following frontal lobe damage in man. Brain, 114, 727–741.
59.
SilversteinB., FisherW. P., KilgoreK. M., HarleyJ. P., & HarveyR.F. (1992). Applying psychometric criteria to functional assessment in medical rehabilitation: II. Defining interval measures. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 73, 507–518.
60.
StaufferL. M., FisherA. G., & DuranL. (2000). Performance of black and white Americans on the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 54, 607–613.
61.
SundetK., FinsetA., & ReinvangI. (1988). Neuropsychological predictors in stroke rehabilitation. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 10, 363–379.
62.
SveenU., Bautz-HolterE., WyllerT. B., & LjunggrenA. E. (1994). Assessment of cognitive impairments after stroke: A methodological study. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 1, 85–93.
63.
ThamK., GinsburgE., FisherA. G., & TegnérR. (2001). Training to improve awareness of disabilities in clients with unilateral neglect. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 55, 46–54.
64.
TromblyC. A. (1995). Occupation: Purposefulness and meaningfulness as therapeutic mechanisms, 1995 Eleanor Clarke Slagle Lecture. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 49, 960–972.
65.
WadeD. T., Langton HewerR., & WoodV. A. (1984). Stroke: Influence of patient's sex and side of weakness on outcome. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 65, 513–516.
66.
WadeD. T. & Langton HewerR. (1986). Stroke: Associations with age, sex, and side of weakness. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 67, 540–545.
67.
World Health Organization [WHO] (2001). International classification of functioning, disability, and health: ICF. Geneva: Author.
68.
WyllerT. B., SødringK. M., & SveenU. (1997). Are there gender differences in functional outcome after stroke?Clinical Rehabilitation, 11, 171–179.
