Abstract
Purpose Among the 32 items of the Motor Function Measure scale, 3 concern the assessment of hand function on a paper-based support. Their characteristics make it possible to envisage the use of a tablet instead of the original paper-based support for their completion. This would then make it possible to automate the score to reduce intra- and inter-individual variability.
The main objective of the present study was to validate the digital completion of items 18, 19, and 22 by measuring the agreement of the scores obtained using a digital tablet with those obtained using the original paper-based support in children and adults with various neuromuscular diseases (NMD). The secondary objective is to calibrate an algorithm for the automatic items scoring.
Design Prospective, multicentre, non-interventional study.
Methods Ninety-eight subjects aged 5 to 60 years with a confirmed NMD completed MFM items 18, 19, and 22 both on a paper support and a digital tablet.
Results The median age of included subjects was 16.2 years. Agreement between scores as assessed using the weighted Kappa coefficient was almost perfect for the scores of items 18 and 22 (K=0.93, and 0.95, respectively) and substantial for item 19 (K=0.70). In all cases of disagreement, the difference was of 1 point. The most frequent disagreement concerned item 19; mainly in the direction of a scoring of 1 point less on the tablet. An automatic analysis algorithm was tested on 82 recordings to suggest improvements.
Conclusion The switch from original paper-based support to the tablet results in minimal and acceptable differences, and maintains a valid and reproducible measure of the 3 items. The developed algorithm for automatic scoring appears feasible with the perspective to include them in a digital application that will make it easier to monitor patients.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
ID: NCT03465358
Funding Statement
Yes
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethics approval was obtained from the regional review board (Comité éthique de Protection des Personnes du Sud-Ouest et Outre-Mer de France).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The de-identified research data supporting this publication could be obtained on request to the corresponding author
