The Finger Dexterity Test: Validation study of a smartphone-based manual dexterity assessment

6Citations
Citations of this article
17Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: The Nine-Hole Peg Test (9HPT) is the golden standard to measure manual dexterity in people with multiple sclerosis (MS). However, administration requires trained personnel and dedicated time during a clinical visit. Objectives: The objective of this study is to validate a smartphone-based test for remote manual dexterity assessment, the icompanion Finger Dexterity Test (FDT), to be included into the icompanion application. Methods: A total of 65 MS and 81 healthy subjects were tested, and 20 healthy subjects were retested 2 weeks later. Results: The FDT significantly correlated with the 9HPT (dominant: ρ = 0.62, p < 0.001; non-dominant: ρ = 0.52, p < 0.001). MS subjects had significantly higher FDT scores than healthy subjects (dominant: p = 0.015; non-dominant: p = 0.013), which was not the case for the 9HPT. A significant correlation with age (dominant: ρ = 0.46, p < 0.001; non-dominant: ρ = 0.40, p = 0.002), Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS, dominant: ρ = 0.36, p = 0.005; non-dominant: ρ = 0.31, p = 0.024), and disease duration for the non-dominant hand (ρ = 0.31, p = 0.016) was observed. There was a good test–retest reliability in healthy subjects (dominant: r = 0.69, p = 0.001; non-dominant: r = 0.87, p < 0.001). Conclusions: The icompanion FDT shows a moderate-to-good concurrent validity and test–retest reliability, differentiates between the MS subjects and healthy controls, and correlates with clinical parameters. This test can be implemented into routine MS care for remote follow-up of manual dexterity.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Van Laethem, D., Denissen, S., Costers, L., Descamps, A., Baijot, J., Van Remoortel, A., … Nagels, G. (2024). The Finger Dexterity Test: Validation study of a smartphone-based manual dexterity assessment. Multiple Sclerosis Journal, 30(1), 121–130. https://doi.org/10.1177/13524585231216007

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free