Comparison of visual and objective quantification of elbow and shoulder movement in children with obstetric brachial plexus palsy^[*]

 

 Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background The Active Movement Scale is a frequently used outcome measure for children with obstetric brachial plexus palsy (OBPP). Clinicians observe upper limb movements while the child is playing and quantify them on an 8 point scale. This scale has acceptable reliability however it is not known whether it accurately depicts the movements observed. In this study, therapist-rated Active Movement Scale grades were compared with objectively-quantified range of elbow flexion and extension and shoulder abduction and flexion in children with OBPP. These movements were chosen as they primarily assess the C5, C6 and C7 nerve roots, the most frequently involved in OBPP. Objective quantification of elbow and shoulder movements was undertaken by two-dimensional motion analysis, using the v-scope.

Methods Young children diagnosed with OBPP were recruited from the Royal Children’s Hospital (Melbourne, Australia) Brachial Plexus registry. They participated in one measurement session where an experienced paediatric physiotherapist facilitated maximal elbow flexion and extension, shoulder abduction and extension through play, and quantified them on the Active Movement Scale. Two-dimensional motion analysis captured the same movements in degrees, which were then converted into Active Movement Score grades using normative reference data. The agreement between the objectively-quantified and therapist-rated grades was determined using percentage agreement and Kappa statistics.

Results Thirty children with OBPP participated in the study. All were able to perform elbow and shoulder movements against gravity. Active Movement Score grades ranged from 5 to 7. Two-dimensional motion analysis revealed that full range of movement at the elbow and shoulder was rarely achieved. There was moderate percentage agreement between the objectively-quantified and therapist-rated methods of movement assessment however the therapist frequently over-estimated the range of movement, particularly at the elbow. When adjusted for chance, agreement was equal to chance.

Conclusion Visual estimates of elbow and shoulder movement in children with OBPP may not provide true estimates of motion. Future work is required to develop accurate, clinically-acceptable methods of quantifying upper limb active movements. Since few children attained full range of motion, elbow and shoulder movement should be monitored and maintained over time to reduce disability later in life.

^*This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

• References

• 1 Birch R. Obstetric brachial plexus palsy. J Hand Surg 2002; 27B: 3-8
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Van Dijk GG, Pondaag W, Malessy MI. Obstetric lesions of the brachial plexus. Muscle Nerve 2001; 24: 1451-1561 10.1002/mus.1168 11745946
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Van Ouwerkerk WJR, van der Sluijs JA, Nollet R, Barkhof F, Sloof ACJ. Management of obstetric brachial plexus lesions: state of the art and future developments. Child’s Nervous System 2000; 16: 638-644 10.1007/s003810000319 11151713
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Bae DS, Waters PM, Zurakowski D. Reliability of three classification systems measuring active motion in brachial plexus birth palsy. J Bone Joint Surg 2003; 85A: 1733-1738
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Ramos LE, Zell JP. Rehabilitation program for children with brachial plexus and peripheral nerve injury. Semin Paediatr Neurol 2002; 7: 52-57 10.1016/S1071-9091(00)80010-8
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Waters PM. Comparison of the natural history, the outcome of microsurgery and the outcome of operative reconstruction in brachial plexus birth palsy. J Bone Joint Surg 1999; 81A: 649-659
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Brazelton TB. Neonatal Behavioural Assessment Scale. Blackwell Scientific Publications Limited; London: 1984
  Google Scholar
• 8 Clarke HM, Curtis CG. An approach to obstetrical brachial injuries. Hand Clinics 1995; 11: 563-581 8567739
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Curtis C, Stephens D, Clarke HM, Andrews D. The active movement scale: an evaluative tool for infants with obstetrical brachial plexus palsy. Hand Clinics 2002; 27A: 470-478
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Guyatt GH, Townsend M, Berman LB, Keller JL. A comparison of likert and visual analogue scales for measuring change in function. J Chronic Dis 1987; 12: 63-66
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Waters PM. Update on management of pediatric brachial plexus palsy. J Pediatr Orthop 2005; 25: 116-126 10.1097/00004694-200501000-00025 15614072
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Bialocerkowski AE, Wrigley T, Galea M. Reliability of the measurement of arm movement in children with obstetric brachial plexus palsy. Develop Med Child Neurol 48: 913-917 10.1017/S001216220600199X 17044960
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Boone DC, Azen S. Normal range of motion of joints in male subjects. J Bone Joint Surg 1979; 61A: 756-759
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1997; 33: 59-174
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Portney LG, Watkins MP. Foundations of clinical research: applications to practice. Prentice-Hall Health; New Jersey: 2nd edition 2000
  Google Scholar
• 16 Cambridge-Keeling CA. Range of motion measurement of the hand Rehabilitation of the Hand: Surgery and Therapy. In: Hunter JM, Mackin EJ, Callahan AD. Mosby; St Louis: 1995: 93-107 4th edition
  Google Scholar
• 17 Gunal I, Kose N, Erdogan O, Gokturk E, Seber S. Normal range of motion of the joints of the upper extremity in male subjects with special reference to side. J Bone Joint Surg 1996; 78A: 1401-1404
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Barnes CJ, Van Steyn SJ, Fischer RA. The effects of age sex and shoulder dominance on range of motion of the shoulder. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2001; 10: 242-246 10.1067/mse.2001.115270 11408905
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Basheer H, Zelic V, Rabia F. Functional scoring system for obstetric brachial plexus palsy. J Hand Surg 2000; 25B: 41-45
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Partridge C, Edwards S. Obstetric brachial plexus palsy: increasing disability and exacerbation of symptoms with age. Physiother Res Internat 2004; 9: 157-163 10.1002/pri.319
  PubMedGoogle Scholar