COA At-a-Glance
Evidence of cognitive interviewing of draft instrument in target patient population
Evidence of internal consistency
Evidence of test-retest or inter-rater reliability
Evidence of concurrent validity
Evidence of known-groups validity
Evidence of ability to detect change over time
Evidence of responder thresholds
Inclusion of the COA in product labelling
- Overview
- Content Validity
- Reliability
- Validity
- Ability to Detect Change
- Responder Thresholds
- Reference(s) of development / validation
- Other references
- Inclusion of the COA in product labelling
- Existence of Scoring / Interpretation / User Manual
- Original language and translations
- References of translations
- Authors and contact information
- Condition of use: copyright
- Website
- Review copy
Overview
Instrument Name: Assessment of Children's Hand Skills
Abbreviation: ACHS
Points for Consideration:
Shown to have a significant ceiling effect, reducing clinical validity.
Description of Tool:
The Assessment of Children's Hand Skills is an ObsRO + ClinRO designed to measure functional hand skill performance in children aged 2 to 12 years. The tool includes 22 activity items and 20 hand skill items. Assessments are made in the child's home, school, or community environments by trained therapists.
Minimum Qualification Required by COA Administrator: MA or BA
Comment:
The ACHS builds upon the Children’s Hands Skills Framework (CHSF)
Year: 2010
Objective of Development:
To measure real-life hand skill performance which is referred to as the use of the hands while performing meaningful activities within natural contexts
Population of Development: Age range (therapeutic indication):
2-12 years (Hand Injuries)
Pediatric Population(s) in which COA has been used:
Nervous system diseases; Mental disorders; Congenital, Hereditary, and Neonatal Diseases and Abnormalities
COA type:
Number of Items 42
Mode of Administration:
Data Collection Mode:
Time for Completion: Less than 60 minutes
Response Scales: 6-point verbal rating scales ranging from 1 "Very ineffective, indicating that the activity completion has been negatively disrupted because the child is unable to perform the hand skill or needs others’ assistance." 2 "= Ineffective, indicating that the examiners sees some problems in the hand skill, which has obviously disrupted the child’s activity performance and results in the child’s ineffective use of time or increased effort" 3 "Slightly ineffective, indicating that the examiner sees some problems in the hand skill, which has minimally disrupted the child’s activity completion" 4 "Slightly effective (or functional), indicating that the child performs the hand skill with functional competence and proficiency that supports the activity completion; however, the examiner sees some miNor problems (e.g. atypical or irregular patterns) when the child performs the hand skill" 5 "= Effective, indicating that the child performs the hand skill with reasonable but Not perfect competence and proficiency; the examiner does Not see any problems when the child performs the hand skill" 6 "Very effective, indicating that the child performs the hand skill with perfect competence and proficiency; the examiner does Not see any problems when the child performs the hand skill"
Summary of Scoring:
Available Scores:
Global score (score range not reported)
Score by items (score range not reported)
Weighting:
No
Score Interpretation:
Higher score: Better performance
Content Validity
Evidence of Literature Review: None identified
Evidence of Instrument Review: Yes
Evidence of Clinical or Expert Input: Yes
Evidence of concept elicitation in target patient population: None identified
Evidence of a Saturation Grid: None identified
Evidence for Selection of Data Collection Method: None identified
Recall/Observation Period:
Evidence for Selection of Reponse Options: None identified
Evidence of cognitive interviewing of draft instrument in target patient population: Yes
Evidence of Preliminary Scoring of Items and Domains: Yes
Evidence related to respondent and administrator burden: None identified
Evidence of a Conceptual Framework: None identified
Evidence of an item-tracking matrix: None identified
Evidence related to item selection: Yes
Evidence of re-testing the final version: None identified
Reliability
Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha): None identified
Test-retest Reliability (ICC):
Chien CW (2014)
For the 22 activity items:
1- Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC): 0.93
- Kappa Coefficient: ranged from 0.71 to 1.00
- % agreement: ranged from 88.9% to 100%
- Was a definition of stability applied to identify stable patients: No
- Time frame or interval between the two administrations: 2 weeks
- Population/Disease: Children with disabilities; n=12 aged from 5 years and 8 months to 10 years and 6 months (mean age= 7 years and 7 months)
2- Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC): 0.61
- Kappa Coefficient: ranged from 0.04 to 1.00
- % of agreement: ranged from 74.1% to 100%
- Was a definition of stability applied to identify stable patients: No
- Time frame or interval between the two administrations: 2 weeks
- Population/Disease: Children with disabilities; n=12 5 aged from 5 years and 8 months to 10 years and 6 months (mean age= 7 years and 7 months)
For the 20 hand skill items:
3- Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC): 0.93
- Weighted Kappa Coefficient: ranged from 0.49 to 0.90
- % agreement: ranged from 63.0% to 90.7%
- Was a definition of stability applied to identify stable patients: No
- Time frame or interval between the two administrations: 2 weeks
- Population/Disease: Children with disabilities; n=12 aged from 5 years and 8 months to 10 years and 6 months (mean age= 7 years and 7 months)
4- Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC): 0.73
- Weighted Kappa Coefficient: ranged from 0.01 to 0.78
- % of agreement: ranged from 41.7% to 98.1%
- Was a definition of stability applied to identify stable patients: No
- Time frame or interval between the two administrations: 2 weeks
- Population/Disease: Children with disabilities; n=12 aged from 5 years and 8 months to 10 years and 6 months (mean age= 7 years and 7 months)
Inter-rater/ inter-interviewer reliability (kappa):
Chien CW (2014)
For the 22 activity items:
1- Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC): 0.37
- Kappa Coefficient: ranged from 0.03 to 1.00
- % of agreement: ranged from 72.2% to 100%
- Population/Disease: Children with disabilities; n=12, aged from 5 years and 8 months to 10 years and 6 months
For the 20 hand skill items:
2- Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC): 0.81
- Weighted Kappa Coefficient: ranged from 0.01 to 0.66
- % of agreement: ranged from 20.0 to 84.6
- Population/Disease: Children with disabilities; n=12, aged from 5 years and 8 months to 10 years and 6 months
Evidence of test-retest or inter-rater reliability: Yes
Validity
Concurrent validity (convergent, divergent):
Chien CW, Brown T (2011)
1- Correlation coefficient used: Spearman's Nonparametric correlation coefficient
- Measure: Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (VABS), Developmental Coordination Disorder Questionnaire (DCDQ), Movement Assessment Battery for Children-Second Edition (MABC-2)
- Results: Significant correlations were found between ACHS, VABS domains, DCDQ domain, and MABC-2 domain: p<0.01 for all results
VABS (n ranged from 89 to 126):
VABS personal living skills: 0.78
VABS fine motor skills: 0.74
DCDQ (n=36):
DCDQ total score: 0.82
DCDQ fine motor/handwriting: 0.79
MABC-2 (n=30):
MABC-2 aiming and catching component score: 0.53
MABC-2 aiming and catching standardised score: 0.51
- Population/Disease: Children typically developing and with disabilities; n see above, age: from a sample between 2 and 12 years
2- Correlation coefficient used: Spearman's Nonparametric correlation coefficient
- Measure: Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (VABS), Movement Assessment Battery for Children-Second Edition (MABC-2)
- Results: Significant correlations were found between ACHS, VABS domains, and MABC-2 domain: p<0.01 for all results
VABS (n ranged from 44 to 60):
VABS personal living skills: 0.74
VABS fine motor skills: 0.60
MABC-2 (n=13):
MABC-2 aiming and catching component score: 0.74
MABC-2 aiming and catching standardised score: 0.73
- Population/Disease: Children typically developing; n see above, age: from a sample between 2 and 12 years
3- Correlation coefficient used: Spearman's Nonparametric correlation coefficient
- Measure: Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (VABS), Movement Assessment Battery for Children-Second Edition (MABC-2)
- Results: Significant correlations were found between ACHS, VABS domains, and MABC-2 domain:
VABS (n ranged from 45 to 66): p<0.01
VABS personal living skills: 0.77
VABS fine motor skills: 0.82
MABC-2 (n=17): p<0.05
MABC-2 aiming and catching component score: 0.57
MABC-2 aiming and catching standardised score: 0.54
- Population/Disease: Children with disabilities; n see above, age: from a sample between 2 and 12 years
4- Correlation coefficient used: Pearson's correlation coefficient
- Measure: Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales - Classroom Edition (VABS-CE)
- Results: Significant correlations were found between ACHS and VABS-CE in the three groups: p<0.05 for all results
Typically developing children (n=139): 0.82
Children with disabilities (n=114): 0.75
Total group of children (n=253): 0.81
- Population/Disease: Children typically developing and with disabilities; n see above, age: from a sample between 2 and 12 years
Chien CW (2012)
5- Correlation coefficient used: Spearman's Nonparametric correlation coefficient
- Measure: Vineland Adaptative Behavior Scales (VABS) and Developmental Coordination Disorder Questionnaire (DCDQ)
- Results: Significant correlations were found between ACHS, VABS and DCDQ: p<0.01 for all results
VABS (n ranged from 62 to 127):
Personal Living Skills subscale: 0.87
Fine Motor Skills subscale: 0.64
DCDQ (n=54):
Total score: 0.79
Fine motor/handwritting factor: 0.76
- Population/Disease: Children typically developing and with disabilities; n see above, age: from a sample of children between 2-12 years (mean age= 6 years 11 months (SD= 2 year 10 months))
6- Correlation coefficient used: Spearman's Nonparametric correlation coefficient
- Measure: Vineland Adaptative Behavior Scales (VABS) and Developmental Coordination Disorder Questionnaire (DCDQ)
- Results: Significant correlations were found between ACHS, VABS and DCDQ: p<0.01 for all results
VABS (n ranged from 46 to 79):
Personal Living Skills subscale: 0.89
Fine Motor Skills subscale: 0.59
DCDQ (n=29):
Total score: 0.79
- Population/Disease: Children typically developing; n see above, age: from a sample of children between 2-12 years (mean age= 6 years 11 months (SD= 2 year 10 months))
7- Correlation coefficient used: Spearman's Nonparametric correlation coefficient
- Measure: Vineland Adaptative Behavior Scales (VABS) and Developmental Coordination Disorder Questionnaire (DCDQ)
- Results: Significant correlations were found between ACHS, VABS and DCDQ: p<0.01 for all results
VABS (n ranged from 16 to 48):
Personal Living Skills subscale: 0.77
Fine Motor Skills subscale: 0.66
DCDQ (n=25):
Total score: 0.62
Fine motor/handwritting factor: 0.58
- Population/Disease: Children with disabilities; n see above, age: from a sample of children between 2-12 years (mean age= 6 years 11 months (SD= 2 year 10 months))
Known-group validity:
Chien CW, Brown T (2011)
KNown-groups validity:
- Measure/Groups of patients: Children typically developing (n=64) and with disabilities (n=70)
- A priori hypotheses: Mean logit scores would be significantly different between groups
- Were hypotheses confirmed: Yes
- Results: Mean logit score of children typically developing was significantly higher than children with disabilities: t test, t=5.24, p<0.01; Mean (SD)
Typically developing: 3.0 (3.2)
With disabilities: 0.6 (2.3)
- Population/Disease: Children typically developing and with disabilities ; n see abov, age: from a sample between 2 and 12 years
Evidence of Translatability Assessment: None identified
Evidence related to missing data: None identified
Evidence for Selection of Recall Period: Yes
Evidence of Administration Instructions and Training Provided: None identified
Evidence of concurrent validity: Yes
Evidence of known-groups validity: Yes
Evidence of ability to detect change over time: None
Ability to Detect Change
Ability to detect change (Responsiveness):
None identified
Responder Thresholds
Evidence of responder thresholds: None identified
Reference(s) of development / validation
Chien CW, Brown T, McDonald R. A framework of children's hand skills for assessment and intervention. Child Care Health Dev. 2009 Nov;35(6):873-84
(Pubmed Abstract: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19702641/)
Chien CW, Brown T, McDonald R. Examining content validity and reliability of the Assessment of Children's Hand Skills (ACHS): a preliminary study. Am J Occup Ther. 2010 Sep-Oct;64(5):756-67
(Full Text Article: https://ajot.aota.org/article.aspx?articleid=1854531)
Chien CW, Brown T, McDonald R. Rasch analysis of the assessment of children's hand skills in children with and without disabilities. Res Dev Disabil. 2011 Jan-Feb;32(1):253-61
(PubMed Abstract: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21041063/)
Chien CW, Brown T, McDonald R, et al. Convergent and discriminant validity of a naturalistic observational assessment of children's hand skills. Hong Kong Journal of Occupational Therapy 2011, 21(2): 64-71
(Abstract: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1016/j.hkjot.2011.10.003)
Chien CW, Brown T, McDonald R. Cross-cultural validity of a naturalistic observational assessment of children's hand skills: a study using Rasch analysis. J Rehabil Med. 2011 Jun;43(7):631-7
(Pubmed Abstract: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22448991/)
Chien CW, Brown T, McDonald R. Examining construct validity of a new naturalistic observational assessment of hand skills for preschool- and school-age children. Aust Occup Ther J. 2012 Apr;59(2):108-20
(PubMed Abstract: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22448991/)
Chien CW, Scanlon C, Rodger S, et al. Intra- and inter-rater reliability of the Assessment of Children’s Hand Skills based on video recordings. British Journal of Occupational Therapy 2014, 77(2): 82-90
(Abstract: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.4276/030802214X13916969447191)
Chien CW, Brown T, McDonald R, et al. The contributing role of real-life hand skill performance in self-care function of children with and without disabilities. Child Care Health Dev. 2014 Jan;40(1):134-44
(Pubmed Abstract: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22928608/)
Other references
See (PubMed results)
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=%22Assessment+of+Children%27s+Hand+Skills%22&sort=date
Inclusion of the COA in product labelling
None identified
Existence of Scoring / Interpretation / User Manual
Original language and translations
Original: English for Australia
Translations:
Taiwanese for Taiwan, Turkish for Turkey
References of translations
Taiwanese for Taiwan:
Chien CW, Brown T, McDonald R. Cross-cultural validity of a naturalistic observational assessment of children's hand skills: a study using Rasch analysis. J Rehabil Med. 2011 Jun;43(7):631-7
Turkish for Turkey:
Gün F, Temizkan E, Bumin G. Validity and reliability of the Turkish versions of Assessment of Children's Hand Skills and Children's Hand-Skills Ability Questionnaire in children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy. Child Care Health Dev. 2021 Mar;47(2):191-200
Condition of use: copyright
Free access but need to purchase the published manual, according to the author Dr. Chi-Wen Chien. For more information on purchasing and downloading the ACHS please visit the ACHS webpage (http://www.childrenhandskills.com/)
With author’s written permission
Website
Children's Hand Skills website (http://www.childrenhandskills.com/)
Review copy
None identified