Background: Upper limb apraxia (ULA) is a neurological syndrome characterized by the inability to perform purposeful movements. ULA could impact individuals’ perceptions, including perceived self-efficacy. The aim of this study is to investigate whether ULA is related to general self-efficacy and self-efficacy for managing symptoms in post-stroke patients. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted involving 82 post-stroke patients. Regression analyses were implemented using a stepwise model including seven dimensions of ULA: imitation (non-symbolic, intransitive, and transitive), pantomime (non-symbolic, intransitive, and transitive), and dimension of apraxic performance in activities of daily living. These dimensions were independent variables, while general self-efficacy and symptom management self-efficacy dimensions were dependent variables. Results: The findings revealed that intransitive imitation accounted for 14% of the variance in general self-efficacy and 10% of self-efficacy for managing emotional symptoms. Transitive imitation explained 10% of the variance in self-efficacy for managing global symptoms and 5% for social–home integration symptoms. The combination of intransitive imitation, non-symbolic pantomime, and alterations in activities of daily living performance associated with ULA explained 24% of the variance in cognitive self-efficacy. Conclusions: Hence, ULA dimensions seem to be related to the levels of general perceived self-efficacy and self-efficacy for managing symptoms among post-stroke patients.

Objective: To evaluate the reliability, identify the optimal cut-off points, and determine the diagnostic accuracy of the TULIA Apraxia test in a sample of Spanish-speaking post-stroke patients. Design: Cross-sectional. Setting: Public primary care. Participants: 201 post-stroke patients. Main Measures: Reliability was assessed using Cronbach's alpha. Cut-off points were identified for each TULIA Apraxia sub-test and stratified for age (≤65 years, > 65 years) using ROC curve analysis, area under the curve, and Youden index. Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated using sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values. Results: Cronbach's alpha of the sub-tests varied from 0.716 (95% CI 0.653–0.772) for pantomime intransitive to 0.824 (95% CI 0.784–0.858) for imitation non-symbolic. Cut-off points ranged from ≤25 to ≤35 points. For individuals aged ≤65 years, the cut-offs that best balanced sensitivity and specificity were ≤25 points for detecting alterations in imitation transitive and ≤33 points for pantomime non-symbolic. For individuals over 65 years, the imitation transitive cut-off (≤26 points) presented the most adjusted balance. The minimum positive predictive value was 0.667 (95% CI 0.542–0.777), indicating that the TULIA Apraxia tests correctly classified more than 67% of patients with apraxia. The minimum negative predictive value was 0.763 (95% CI 0.644–0.859), showing that the test accurately identified more than 76% of patients without apraxia. Conclusions: The TULIA Apraxia test is reliable in Spanish-speaking post-stroke patients. Optimal cut-off points, along with their respective sensitivity and specificity values, exhibit adequate test accuracy. Predictive values indicate that the test correctly identifies individuals with and without apraxia.