Table 2 Relationship between AGF score and upper limb/hand function evaluation.

From: Relationship between adjustability of grasping force and upper limb/hand function in individuals with cerebrovascular disorders

 

Age

FMA

STEF

(more-affected)

STEF

(less-affected)

ARAT

(more-affected)

ARAT

(less-affected)

MAL

(AOU)

MAL

(QOM)

AGF score on the more-affected side (g)

 Total sections

0.71*

− 0.13

− 0.26

− 0.30

− 0.28

− 0.24

− 0.21

− 0.06

 Isometric sections

0.62*

0.14

− 0.03

− 0.17

− 0.04

− 0.30

0.01

0.15

 Concentric sections

0.71*

− 0.13

− 0.26

− 0.30

− 0.28

− 0.24

− 0.21

− 0.06

 Eccentric sections

0.56

− 0.12

− 0.02

− 0.18

− 0.19

− 0.51

− 0.11

0.07

AGF score on the less-affected side (g)

 Total sections

0.71**

0.08

0.01

− 0.68*

− 0.04

− 0.57

0.05

0.26

 Isometric sections

0.69*

0.38

0.33

− 0.70*

0.36

− 0.64*

0.46

0.61*

 Concentric sections

0.64*

0.14

0.05

− 0.56

0.04

− 0.50

0.08

0.34

 Eccentric sections

0.73**

0.15

0.11

− 0.59*

0.04

− 0.57

0.11

0.30

  1. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients (r) are shown between AGF scores for each section (total, isometric, concentric, and eccentric) and age, as well as upper limb functional measures (FMA, STEF, ARAT, and MAL). * = p < 0.05, ** = p < 0.01. Lower AGF scores indicate better AGF.
  2. FMA: Fugl-Meyer Assessment, STEF: Simple Test for Evaluating Hand Function, ARAT: Action Research Arm Test, MAL: Motor Activity Log-14, AOU: amount of use, QOM: quality of movement, AGF: adjustability of grasping force.
Back to article page