Abstract
Aims To assess the reliability of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) when conducted via recorded telehealth sessions by novice and expert raters. Methods Ten assessors (six novice, four expert) independently rated recorded telehealth assessments of 23 neurodevelopmentally high-risk infants twice. Inter- and intra-rater reliability of subscale scores, total score and percentile rankings were determined. Results AIMS total score inter-rater reliability was excellent across all raters (ICC = 0.92–0.96). Inter-rater-reliability across prone, supine and sitting subscale scores was excellent (ICC = 0.90–0.96) but variable for standing subscale (ICC = 0.06–0.65). Novice total score intra-rater reliability was variable (ICC = 0.45–0.94); expert reliability was excellent (ICC = 0.93–1.00). Recording to real-time telehealth assessment had excellent intra-rater reliability (ICC = 0.96). Time taken to complete the assessment was comparable to a face-to-face assessment (mean: 14.9 min). Novices paused/replayed each video more than experts (2.2 compared to 1.0 in Time 1; and 1.0 compared to 0.5 in Time 2). Conclusions The AIMS assessment is reliable when undertaken via telehealth consultation. Time taken to complete the assessment is comparable to a face-to-face assessment. Novice inter-rater reliability was similar to experts. Training and the ability to pause/review infant motor performance may explain the accuracy achieved.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call