The de Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI) provides a valid method for measuring and monitoring the mobility of patients making the transition from hospital to the community: An observational study

Journal of Physiotherapy

Volumn 57, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 109-116

  De Morton, Natalie A ^a   Brusco, Natasha K ^a,b   Wood, Lauri ^c   Lawler, Katherine ^b   Taylor, Nicholas F ^a,b  

^a LA TROBE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b EASTERN HEALTH   (Australia)

^c Echuca Regional Health Australia ^*  (Australia)

Author keywords

Measurement; Mobility; Older adults; Physical ability; Physiotherapy

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; DEMOGRAPHY; DISABILITY; FEMALE; HOSPITAL DISCHARGE; HUMAN; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT CARE; PHYSIOTHERAPY; REPRODUCIBILITY; STANDARD; VALIDATION STUDY;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CONTINUITY OF PATIENT CARE; DISABILITY EVALUATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PATIENT DISCHARGE; PHYSICAL THERAPY MODALITIES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESIDENCE CHARACTERISTICS;

EID: 79960614836     PISSN: 18369553     EISSN: 18369561     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1836-9553(11)70021-2     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Barrett B., Brown D., Mundt M., Brown R. Sufficiently important difference: expanding the framework of clinical significance. Medical Decision Making 2005, 25:250-261.
2. Barrett B., Brown R., Mundt M., Dye L., Alt J., Safdar N., et al. Using benefit harm tradeoffs to estimate sufficiently important difference: the case of the common cold. Medical Decision Making 2005, 25:47-55.
3. Belvedere S., de Morton N. The application of Rasch analysis in healthcare is increasing and is applied for variable reasons in mobility instruments. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2010, 63:1287-1297.
4. Charlson M.E., Pompei P., Ales K.L., MacKenzie C.R. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. Journal of Chronic Disease 1987, 40:373-383.
5. Collin C., Wade D.T., Davies S., Home V. The Barthel ADL Index: a reliability study. International Disability Studies 1988, 10:61-63.
6. Davenport S., de Morton N. The reliability and validity of the de Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI) in healthy community dwelling older adults. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2010, 92:51-58.
7. Davenport S., Paynter S., de Morton N. What instruments have been used to assess the mobility of community dwelling older adults?. Physical Therapy Reviews 2008, 13:345-354.
8. de Morton N., Berlowitz D., Keating J. A systematic review of mobility instruments and their measurement properties for older acute medical patients. BMC Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2008, 6(44).
9. de Morton N., Davidson M., Keating J. The de Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI): an essential index for an ageing world. BMC Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2008, 6(63).
10. de Morton N., Keating J., Davidson M. Rasch analysis of the Barthel Index in the assessment of hospitalised older patients following admission for an acute medical condition. Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation 2008, 89:641-647.
11. de Morton N., Lane K. Validity and reliability of the de Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI) in the subacute hospital setting in a geriatric evaluation and management (GEM) population. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2010, 42:956-961.
12. de Morton N, Meyer C, Moore K, Dow B, Jones CJ, Hill K (In press) Validation of the de Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI) with older community care recipients. Australasian Journal of Ageing.
13. de Morton N.A., Keating J.L., Berlowitz D.J., Jackson B., Lim W.K. Additional exercise does not change hospital or patient outcomes in older medical patients: a controlled clinical trial. Australian Journal of Physiotherapy 2007, 53:105-111.
14. Department of Health and Ageing (2008) National Evaluation of the Transition Care Program: Final Evaluation Report. Accessed at on 15th September 2010. http://www.health.gov.au/.
15. Dewing J. A critique of the Barthel Index. British Journal of Nursing 1992, 1:325-329.
16. Ferreira M., Herbert R. What does 'clinically important' really mean?. Australian Journal of Physiotherapy 2008, 54:229-230.
17. Guyatt G.H., Walter S., Norman G. Measuring change over time: assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments. Journal of Chronic Disease 1987, 40:171-178.
18. Hachisuka K., Ogata H. Test-retest and inter-method reliability of the self-rating Barthel Index. Clinical Rehabilitation 1997, 11:28-35.
19. Hill K., Moore K., Dorevitch M., Day L. Effectiveness of falls clinics: an evaluation of outcomes and client adherence to recommended interventions. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 2008, 56:600-608.
20. Husted J., Cook R., Farewell V., Gladman D. Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2000, 53:459-468.
21. Jensen G., Gwyer J., Hack L., Shepard K. Expertise in physical therapy practice. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 1999, (4). CD003010.
22. Kazis L.E., Anderson J.J., Meenan R.F. Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Medical Care 1989, 27:S178-S189.
23. Norman G.R., Sloan J.A., Wyrwich K.W. Interpretation of changes on health related quality of life. The remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Medical Care 2003, 41:582-592.
24. Shah S., Vanclay F., Cooper B. Improving the sensitivity of the Barthel Index for stroke rehabilitation. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1989, 42:703-709.
25. Tennant A., Pallant J. Unidimensionality matters! (A tale of two Smiths?). Rasch measurement transactions 2006, 20:1048-1051.
26. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health 2001, World Health Organisation, World Health Organisation, Geneva.