Segmental Assessment of Trunk Control (SATCo)
Updates to the SATCo are listed below with bolded and underlined headings. See original post for complete testing information.
Edition: This appears to be the first and only edition of the SATCo.
Target Population and Ages: Young Children; original study used children from 1yr 6mo to 17yrs 1mo for an average age of 10yrs 4mo).
Dates of Publication: Butler et al., 2010
Authors: Penelope Butler PhD, MCSP, Sandy Saavedra, MS, PT, Madeline Sofranoc, BS, Sarah Jarvis, MSc, MCSP, and Marjorie Woollacott, PhD
Source: Pediatric Physical Therapy 22(3)
Costs: N/A
Examiner Qualifications: There are no examiner qualifications. Inexperienced raters are able to achieve comparable reliability to experienced raters without extensive practice.
Reference:
Butler P, Saavedra S, Sofranac M, Jarvis S, Woollacott M. Refinement, Reliability and Validity of the Segmental Assessment of Trunk Control (SATCo). Pediatric physical therapy : the official publication of the Section on Pediatrics of the American Physical Therapy Association. 2010;22(3):246-257. doi:10.1097/PEP.0b013e3181e69490.
Article Review:
Hansen L, Erhardsen KT, Bencke J, Magnusson SP, Curtis DJ. The reliability of the segmental assessment of trunk control (SATCo) in children with cerebral palsy. Physical and Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics. 2017; DOI: 10.1080/01942638.2017.1337662
CP may affect development and movement in children resulting in postural control impairments. The SATCo measures trunk postural control in children with CP to determine the level at which to begin postural training, and the SATCo tests the trunk as various segments rather than a whole. Reliability/validity has been tested in children with neuromotor disability and typically developing infants, but reliability has not yet been assessed without the use of video recordings. The purpose of the study is to determine whether this test could be used reliably in the clinic without video playback and whether the scores differ between video and live (non-video) assessments. The researchers were looking at differences between video and live scores, as well as, inter-rater and intra-rater test-retest reliability. Thirty-one children were recruited between the ages of 9mo and 17yrs with CP diagnosis. There were two raters who both scored the children in the clinic (live) and then re-scored the same sessions four weeks later via video recording in attempts to account for recall bias in scoring. The two raters excluded some participants due to scoring ineligibility. Twenty of the participants were tested again within two weeks to determine inter/intra-rater test-retest reliability. The researchers determine there was excellent reliability of the SATCo without video. Although video and live scores differed across all SATCo levels, there was no significant difference between live and video scores, intra-rater scores, inter-rater scores. The ICC values ranged from 0.95 to 1.00 over the three areas.
I thought that this study had a good design. They attempted to account for any learning by participants and recall bias scoring by raters through increased time between retests and scoring. Also, raters were blinded from the other’s scores. They did find that there were disagreements across all SATCo levels between video and live scores, but I believe this can be explained by the fact that during a video analysis, you are able to pause, rewind, and replay in order to determine the precise level of impairment, whereas in a live scoring, it is possible to miss subtle compensations. As for some areas for improvement, the sample size was fairly low only having 28 participant scores involved in data analysis. The participants also had a wide age range which could have cause some score inaccuracies, especially in the younger ages. The participants had various GMFCS levels, mostly I and V, allowing for ceiling or floor effects of the SATCo. They attempted to allow adequate time between test-retest (2 weeks), but some learning may have occurred and scores may have, therefore, been affected. Lastly, the raters were not experienced in test administration. This probably was not a huge setback, since there has been research to say that raters can reach comparable reliability to an expert without extensive practice. Overall, I believe this was a good study and that they definitely showed that the SATCo can be used reliably in the clinic without the use of video recording, although, video recording is shown more precise. It should just be noted that there will most likely be a difference in deficit level observed between video and live scoring.
One response to “Segmental Assessment of Trunk Control (SATCo)”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Jacob,
I think this is a great article because especially in the hospital setting, video recording is difficult due to HIPAA violations and hospital regulations. Or, if I did not have an assistant to record. Based on the results of this study, I would try to use video if possible but still incorporate the SATCo if video was not feasible. Great job!