Background: Functional limitation of the upper extremities is common in patients with stroke. An upper-extremity measure with sound psychometric properties is indispensable for clinical and research use.Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the psychometric properties of 4 clinical measures for assessing upper-extremity motor function in people with stroke: the upper-extremity subscale of the Fugl-Meyer Motor Test (UE-FM), the upper-extremity subscale of the Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement, the Action Research Arm Test (ARAT), and the Wolf Motor Function Test.Design: This was a prospective, longitudinal study.Methods: Fifty-three people with stroke were evaluated with the 4 measures at 4 time points (14, 30, 90, and 180 days after stroke). Thirty-five participants completed all of the assessments. The ceiling and floor effects, validity (concurrent validity and predictive validity), and responsiveness of each measure were examined. Interrater reliability and test-retest reliability also were examined.Results: All measures, except for the UE-FM, had significant floor effects or ceiling effects at one or more time points. The Spearman ρ correlation coefficient for each pair of the 4 measures was ≥.81, indicating high concurrent validity. The predictive validity of the 4 measures was satisfactory (Spearman ρ, ≥.51). The responsiveness of the 4 measures at 14 to 180 days after stroke was moderate (.52 ≤ effect size ≤ .79). The 4 measures had good interrater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC], ≥.92) and test-retest reliability (ICC, ≥.97). Only the minimal detectable changes of the UE-FM (8% of the highest possible score) and the ARAT (6%) were satisfactory.Limitations: The sample size was too small to conduct data analysis according to type or severity of stroke. In addition, the timed component of the Wolf Motor Function Test was not used in this study.Conclusions: All 4 measures showed sufficient validity, responsiveness, and reliability in participants with stroke. The UE-FM for assessing impairment and the ARAT for assessing disability had satisfactory minimal detectable changes, supporting their utility in clinical settings.

Aging has less effect on adipose‐derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADSCs) than on bone marrow‐derived mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs), but whether the fact holds true in stem cells from elderly patients with osteoporotic fractures is unknown. In this study, ADSCs and BMSCs of the same donor were harvested and divided into two age groups. Group A consisted of 14 young patients (36.4 ± 11.8 years old), and group B consisted of eight elderly patients (71.4 ± 3.6 years old) with osteoporotic fractures. We found that the doubling time of ADSCs from both age groups was maintained below 70 hrs, while that of BMSCs increased significantly with the number of passage. When ADSCs and BMSCs from the same patient were compared, there was a significant increase in the doubling time of BMSCs in each individual from passages 3 to 6. On osteogenic induction, the level of matrix mineralization of ADSCs from group B was comparable to that of ADSCs from group A, whereas BMSCs from group B produced least amount of mineral deposits and had a lower expression level of osteogenic genes. The p21 gene expression and senescence‐associated β‐galactosidase activity were lower in ADSCs compared to BMSCs, which may be partly responsible for the greater proliferation and differentiation potential of ADSCs. It is concluded that the proliferation and osteogenic differentiation of ADSCs were less affected by age and multiple passage than BMSCs, suggesting that ADSCs may become a potentially effective therapeutic option for cell‐based therapy, especially in elderly patients with osteoporosis.

Glucocorticoid usage, a leading cause of osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH), and its prevalence was reported in 25%-50% of non-traumatic ONFH patients. Nevertheless, there have been no unified criteria to classify glucocorticoid-associated ONFH (GA-ONFH). In 2015, the Association Research Circulation Osseous addressed the issue of developing a classification scheme. In June 2017, a task force was set up to conduct a Delphi survey concerning ONFH. The task force invited 28 experts in osteonecrosis/bone circulation from 8 countries. Each round of the Delphi survey consists of questionnaires, analysis of replies, and feedback reports to the panel. After 3 rounds of the survey, the panel reached a consensus on the classification criteria. The response rates were 100% (Round 1), 96% (Round 2), and 100% (Round 3), respectively. The consensus on the classification criteria of GA-ONFH included the following: (1) patients should have a history of glucocorticoid use >2 g of prednisolone or its equivalent within a 3-month period; (2) osteonecrosis should be diagnosed within 2 years after glucocorticoid usage, and (3) patients should not have other risk factor(s) besides glucocorticoids. Association Research Circulation Osseous established classification criteria to standardize clinical studies concerning GA-ONFH.