Past and present issues in Rasch analysis: The Functional Independence Measure (FIM™) revisited

Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine

Volumn 43, Issue 10, 2011, Pages 884-891

  Nilsson, Åsa Lundgren ^a   Tennant, Alan ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Functional Independence Measure; Outcome assessment; Patient; Physiopathology; Psychometrics; Rasch

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONVALESCENCE; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PSYCHOMETRY; STROKE; THEORETICAL MODEL;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; HUMANS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PSYCHOMETRICS; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; STROKE;

EID: 80155129970     PISSN: 16501977     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2340/16501977-0871     Document Type: Review

References (98)

1. Rasch G. Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen: Danish Institution for Educational Research; 1960.
2. Rosenberg R, Allerup P, Bech P. Measurement of clinical observations. Introduction of Rasch's item-analysis models. Ugeskrift for Laeger 1979; 141: 3232-3235. (Pubitemid 10205901)
3. Bech P, Allerup P, Gram LF. The Hamilton Depression Scale. Evaluation of objectivity using logistic models. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1981; 63: 290-299. (Pubitemid 11137960)
4. Lewine RR, Fogg L, Meltzer HY. Assessment of negative and positive symptoms in schizophrenia. Schiz Bull 1983; 9: 368-376.
5. Wright BD, Linacre JM. Observations are always ordinal; measurements, however, must be interval. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1989; 70: 857-860
6. Silverstein B, Fisher WP, Kilgore KM, Harley JP, Harvey RF. Applying psychometric criteria to functional assessment in medical rehabilitation: II. Defining interval measures. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1992; 73: 507-518.
7. Keith RA, Granger CV, Hamilton BB, Sherwin FS. The functional independence measure: a new tool for rehabilitation. Adv Clin Rehabil 1987, 1: 6-18.
8. Linacre JM, Heinemann AW, Wright BD, Granger CV, Hamilton BB. The structure and stability of the functional independence measure. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1994; 75: 127-132. (Pubitemid 24061483)
9. Guttman LA. The basis for Scalogram analysis. In: Stouffer SA, Guttman LA, Suchman FA, Lazarsfeld PF, Star SA, Clausen JA, editors. Studies in social psychology in World War II: vol 4. measurement and prediction. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1950, p. 60-90.
10. Luce RD, Tukey JW. Simultaneous conjoint measurement: a new type of fundamental measurement. J Math Psychol 1964; 1: 1-27.
11. Newby van A, Conner GR, Grant CP, Bunderson CV. The Rasch model and additive conjoint measurement. J Appl Meas 2009; 10: 348-354.
12. Andrich D. Rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrica 1978; 43: 561-573.
13. Masters G. A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrica 1982; 47: 149-174.
14. Granger CV, Hamilton BB, Linacre JM, Heinemann AW, Wright BD. Performance profiles of the functional independence measure. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1993; 72: 84-89. (Pubitemid 23144146)
15. Heinemann AW, Linacre JM, Wright BD, Hamilton BB, Granger C. Relationships between impairment and physical disability as measured by the Functional Independence Measure. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1993; 74: 566-573. (Pubitemid 23172757)
16. Heinemann AW, Linacre JM, Wright BD, Hamilton BB, Granger C. Measurement characteristics of the Functional Independence Measure. Top Stroke Rehabil 1994; 1: 1-15.
17. Cowen TD, Huang C-T, Lebow J, DeVivo MJ, Hawkins LN. Functional outcomes after inpatient rehabilitation of patients with end-stage renal disease. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1995; 76: 355-359.
18. Fisher Jr WP, Harvey RF, Taylor P, Kilgore KM, Kelly CK. Rehabits: a common language of functional assessment. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1995; 76: 113-122.
19. Chang W-C, Chan C. Rasch analysis for outcomes measures: some methodological considerations. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 1995; 76: 934-939.
20. Tsuji T, Sonoda S, Domen K, Saitoh E, Liu M, Chino N. ADL structure for stroke patients in Japan based on the functional independence measure. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1995; 74: 432-438. (Pubitemid 26005311)
21. Grimby G, Gudjonsson G, Rodhe M, Sunnerhagen KS, Sundh V, Östensson M-L. The Functional Independence Measure in Sweden: experience for outcome measurement in rehabilitation medicine. Scand J Rehab Med 1996; 28: 51-62. (Pubitemid 26194378)
22. Stineman MG, Shea JA, Jette A, Tassoni CJ, Ottenbacher KJ, Fiedler R, Granger CV. The Functional Independence Measure: tests of scaling assumptions, structure, and reliability across 20 diverse impairment categories. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1996; 77: 1101-1108. (Pubitemid 26378626)
23. Grimby G, Andrén E, Holmgren E, Wright B, Linacre JM, Sundh V. Structure of a combination of functional independence measure and instrumental activity measure items in community-living persons: a study of individuals with cerebral palsy and spina bifida. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1996; 77: 1109-1114. (Pubitemid 26378627)
24. Pollak N, Rheault W, Stoecker JL. Reliability and validity of the FIM for persons aged 80 years and above from a multilevel continuing care retirement community. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1996; 77: 1056-1061. (Pubitemid 26339631)
25. Stineman MG, Hamilton BB, Goin JE, Granger CV, Fiedler RC. Functional gain and length of stay for major rehabilitation impairment categories: patterns revealed by function related groups. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1996; 75: 68-78. (Pubitemid 26081535)
26. Werner RA, Kessler S. Effectiveness of an intensive outpatient rehabilitation program for postacute stroke patients. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1996; 75: 114-120. (Pubitemid 26123982)
27. Chang WC, Slaughter S, Cartwright D, Chan C. Evaluating the FONE FIM: part I. Construct validity. J Outcome Meas 1997; 1: 192-218.
28. Chang WC, Chan C, Slaughter SE, Cartwright D. Evaluating the FONE FIM: part II. Concurrent validity & influencing factors. J Outcome Meas 1997; 1: 259-285.
29. Meythaler JM, Devivo MJ, Braswell WC. Rehabilitation outcomes of patients who have developed Guillain-Barre syndrome. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1997; 76: 411-419. (Pubitemid 27460851)
30. Grimby G, Andrén E, Daving Y, Wright B. Dependence and perceived difficulty in daily activities in community-living stroke survivors 2 years after stroke: a study of instrumental structures. Stroke 1998; 29: 1843-1849. (Pubitemid 28399975)
31. Meythaler JM, Hazlewood J, DeVivo MJ, Rosner M. Elevated liver enzymes after nontraumatic intracranial hemorrhages. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1998; 79: 766-771. (Pubitemid 28322137)
32. Leonard CT, Milller KE, Griffiths HI, McClatchie BJ, Wherry AB. A sequential study assessing functional outcomes of firsttime stroke survivors 1 to 5 years after rehabilitation. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 1998; 7: 145-153.
33. Harvey RL, Roth EJ, Heinemann AW, Lovell LL, McGuire JR, Diaz S. Stroke rehabilitation: clinical predictors of resource utilization. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1998; 79: 1349-1355. (Pubitemid 28525116)
34. Roth EJ, Heinemann AW, Lovell LL, Harvey RL, McGuire JR, Diaz S. Impairment and disability: their relation during stroke rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1998; 79: 329-335. (Pubitemid 28207123)
35. Tesio L, Cantagallo A. The functional assessment Measure (FAM) in closed traumatic brain injury outpatients: a Rasch-based psychometric study. J Outcome Meas 1998; 2: 79-96.
36. Linacre JM. Detecting multidimensionality: which residual datatype works best? J Outcome Meas 1998; 2: 266-283.
37. Granger CV, Deutsch A, Linn RT. Rasch analysis of the functional independence measure (FIM(TM)) mastery test. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1998; 79: 52-57. (Pubitemid 28098923)
38. Tsuji T, Liu M, Toikawa H, Hanayama K, Sonoda S, Chino N. ADL structure for nondisabled Japanese children based on the functional independence measure for children (WeeFIM(TM)) Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1999; 78: 208-212. (Pubitemid 29227165)
39. Hawley CA, Taylor R, Hellawell DJ, Pentland B. Use of the functional assessment measure (FIM+FAM) in head injury rehabilitation: a psychometric analysis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1999; 67: 749-754.
40. Linn RT, Blair RS, Granger CV, Harper DW, O'Hara PA, Maciura E. Does the functional assessment measure (FAM) extend the functional independence measure (FIM) instrument? A Rasch analysis of stroke inpatients. J Outcome Meas 1999; 3: 339-359.
41. Dijkers MP.JM, Yavuzer G. Short versions of the telephone motor functional independence measure for use with persons with spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999; 80: 1477-1484. (Pubitemid 29526647)
42. Granger CV, Linn RT. Biologic patterns of disability. J Outcome Meas 2000; 4: 595-615.
43. Linacre JM. FIM levels as ordinal categories. J Outcome Meas 2000; 4: 616-633.
44. Küçükdeveci AA, Yavuzer G, Elhan AH, Sonel B, Tennant A. Adaptation of the functional independence measure for use in Turkey. Clin Rehabil 2001; 15: 311-319. (Pubitemid 32471890)
45. Chira-Adisai W, Yan K, Shahani BT, Dphil O. Changes in serial correlation coefficients and fractional parameters during functional recovery in stroke patients. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol 2001; 41: 79-86. (Pubitemid 32215384)
46. Chen CC, Heinemann AW, Granger CV, Linn RT. Functional gains and therapy intensity during subacute rehabilitation: a study of 20 facilities. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002; 83: 1514-1523. (Pubitemid 35304126)
47. Brock KA, Goldie PA, Greenwood KM. Evaluating the effectiveness of stroke rehabilitation: choosing a discriminative measure. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002; 83: 92-99. (Pubitemid 34052146)
48. Dijkers MP. A computer adaptive testing simulation applied to the FIM instrument motor component. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2003; 84, 3 Suppl 1: S384-S393.
49. Coster WJ, Haley SM, Andres L, Ludlow LH, Bond TL, Ni PS. Refining the conceptual basis for rehabilitation outcome measurement: personal care and instrumental activities domain. Med Care 2004; 42 Suppl 1: I62-I72.
50. Coster WJ, Haley SM, Ludlow LH, Andres PL, Ni PS. Development of an applied cognition scale to measure rehabilitation outcomes. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004; 85: 2030-2035. (Pubitemid 39593532)
51. Tennant A, Penta M, Tesio L, Grimby G, Thonnard JL, Slade A, et al. Assessing and adjusting for cross-cultural validity of impairment and activity limitation scales through differential item functioning within the framework of the Rasch model: the PROESOR project. Med Care 2004; 42 Suppl 1: I37-I48.
52. Andrén E, Grimby G. Activity limitations in personal, domestic and vocational tasks: a study of adults with inborn and early acquired mobility disorders. Disabil Rehabil 2004; 26: 262-271. (Pubitemid 38401285)
53. Andrén E, Grimby G. Dependence in daily activities and life satisfaction in adult subjects with cerebral palsy or spina bifida: a follow-up study. Disabil Rehabil 2004; 26: 528-536. (Pubitemid 38771942)
54. Gauggel S, Böcker M, Zimmermann P, Privou C, Lutz D. Itemresponse-theorie und deren anwendung in der neurologie. Messung von aktivitätseinschränkungen neurologischer patienten. Nervenarzt 2004; 75: 1179-1186.
55. Siebens H, Andres PL, Pengsheng N, Coster WJ, Haley SM. Measuring physical function in patients with complex medical and postsurgical conditions: a computer adaptive approach. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2005; 84: 741-748. (Pubitemid 41416270)
56. Dallmeijer A, Dekker J, Roorda L, Knol D, van Baalen B, de Groot V, et al. Differential item functioning of the functional independence measure in higher performing neurological patients. J Rehab Med 2005; 37: 346-352. (Pubitemid 41823729)
57. Lundgren-Nilsson Å, Grimby G, Ring H, Tesio L, Lawton G, Slade A, et al. Cross-cultural validity of Functional Independence Measure items in stroke: a study using Rasch analysis. J Rehab Med 2005; 37: 23-31. (Pubitemid 40214505)
58. Nilsson ÅL, Sunnerhagen KS, Grimby G. Scoring alternatives for FIM in neurological disorders applying Rasch analysis. Acta Neurol Scand 2005; 111: 264-273. (Pubitemid 40380463)
59. New PW. Functional outcomes and disability after nontraumatic spinal cord injury rehabilitation: results from a retrospective study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005; 86: 250-261. (Pubitemid 40215287)
60. Sliwa JA, Heinemann A, Semik P. Inpatient rehabilitation following burn injury: patient demographics and functional outcomes. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005; 86: 1920-1923. (Pubitemid 41423617)
61. Chen CC, Bode RK, Granger CV, Heinemann AW. Psychometric properties and developmental differences in children's ADL item hierarchy: a study of the WeeFIM® instrument. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2005; 84: 671-679. (Pubitemid 41248460)
62. Odell KH, Wollack JA, Flynn M. Functional outcomes in patients with right hemisphere brain damage. Aphasiology, 2005; 19: 807-830. (Pubitemid 41645392)
63. Yamada S, Liu M, Hase K, Tanaka N, Fujiwara T, Tsuji T, et al. Development of a short version of the motor FIM™ for use in long-term care settings. J Rehab Med 2006; 38: 50-56. (Pubitemid 43173182)
64. Koyama T, Matsumoto K, Okuno T, Domen K. Relationships between independence level of single motor-FIM items and FIMmotor scores in patients with hemiplegia after stroke: an ordinal logistic modeling study. J Rehab Med 2006; 38 5: 280-286. (Pubitemid 44295590)
65. Lawton G, Lundgren-Nilsson Å, Biering-Sørensen F, Tesio L, Slade A, Penta M, et al. Cross-cultural validity of FIM in spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 2006; 44: 746-752. (Pubitemid 44934982)
66. Lundgren-Nilsson Å, Tennant A, Grimby G, Sunnerhagen K.S. Cross-diagnostic validity in a generic instrument: an example from the Functional Independence Measure in Scandinavia. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2006; 4: 55.
67. Johnston MV, Shawaryn MA, Malec J, Kreutzer J, Hammond FM. The structure of functional and community outcomes following traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury 2006; 20: 391-407. (Pubitemid 43832365)
68. Cantagallo A, Carli S, Simone A, Tesio L. MINDFIM: a measure of disability in high-functioning traumatic brain injury outpatients. Brain Inj 2006; 20: 913-925. (Pubitemid 44594151)
69. New PW. Influences of age and gender on rehabilitation outcomes in nontraumatic spinal cord injury. J Spinal Cord Med 2007; 30: 225-237. (Pubitemid 47092893)
70. Velozo CA, Byers KL, Wang Y-C, Joseph BR. Translating measures across the continuum of care: using Rasch analysis to create a crosswalk between the Functional Independence Measure and the Minimum Data Set. J Rehab Res Dev 2007; 44: 467-478. (Pubitemid 47075818)
71. Tur BS, Küçükdeveci AA, Kutlay S, Yavuzer G, Elhan AH, Tennant A. Psychometric properties of the WeeFIM in children with cerebral palsy in Turkey. Dev Med Child Neurol 2009; 51: 732-838.
72. Haley SM, McHorney CA, Ware JE Jr. Evaluation 72. of the MOS SF-36 physical functioning scale (PF-10): I. Unidimensionality and reproducibility of the Rasch item scale. J Clin Epidemiol 1994; 47: 671-684. (Pubitemid 24171234)
73. Thurstone LL. Attitudes can be measured. Am J Sociol 1928; 33: 529-554.
74. Tennant A, Hillman M, Fear J, Pickering A, Chamberlain MA. Are we making the most of the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire? Brit J Rheum 1996; 35: 574-578.
75. Andrich D, Marinas I. Formalizing dimension and response violations of local independence in the unidimensional Rasch model. J Appl Meas 2008; 9: 200-215.
76. Andrich D. A latent trait model for items with response dependencies: implications for test construction and analysis. In: Embretson SE, editor. Test design: developments in psychology and psychometrics. Orlando, FL: Academic Press; 1985.
77. Wainer H, Kiely G. Item clusters and computer adaptive testing: a case for testlets. J Educ Meas 1987; 24: 185-202.
78. Holland PW, Wainer H. Differential item functioning. NJ, Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1993.
79. Linacre JM. Sample size and item calibration stability. Rasch Meas Transact 1994; 7: 328.
80. Pallant JF Tennant A. An introduction to the Rasch measurement model: an example using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Br J Clinl Psychol 2007; 46: 1-18. (Pubitemid 46332274)
81. Tennant A, Conaghan PG. The Rasch measurement model in rheumatology: what is it and why use it? When should it be applied, and what should one look for in a Rasch paper? Arthritis Rheum 2007; 57: 1358-1362. (Pubitemid 350308830)
82. Hagquist C, Bruce M, Gustavsson JP. Using the Rasch model in nursing research: an introduction and illustrative example. Int J Nurs Stud 2009; 46: 380-393.
83. Ehhan AH, Kucukdeveci AA, Tennant A. The Rasch measurement model. In: Franco Franchignoni, editor. Research issues in physical and rehabilitation medicine. Advances in rehabilitation. Vol. 19. Pavia: Maugeri Foundation; 2010, p. 89-102.
84. Andrich D, Lyne A, Sheridan B, Luo G. RUMM 2030. Perth: RUMM Laboratory; 2010.
85. Tesio L. Rasch analysis: valid, useful, or both? Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2008; 44: 365-366.
86. Smith EV, Jr. Detecting and evaluating the impact of multidimensionality using item fit statistics and principal component analysis of residuals. J Appl Meas 2002; 3: 205-231.
87. Tennant A, Pallant JF. Unidimensionality matters! Rasch Meas Transact 2006; 20: 1048-1051.
88. Dorans NJ, Holland PW. DIF detection and description: Mantel-Haenszel and standardisation. In: Holland PW, Wainer H, editors. Differential item functioning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1993, p. 36-66.
89. Wang W-C. Assessment of differential item functioning. J Appl Meas 2008; 9: 387-408.
90. Lange R, Thalbourne MA, Houran J, Lester D. Depressive response sets due to gender and culture based differential item functioning. Personality Indiv Diff 2002; 33: 937-952.
91. Teresi JA, Ocepek-Welikson K, Kleinman M, Cook KF, Crane PK, Gibbons LE, et al. Evaluating measurement equivalence using the item response theory log-likelihood ratio (IRTLR) method to assess differential item functioning (DIF): applications (with illustrations) to measures of physical functioning ability and general distress. Qual Life Res 2007; 16 Suppl 1: S43-S68.
92. Teresi JA. Different approaches to differential item functioning in health applications: advantages, disadvantages and some neglected topics. Med Care 2006; 44: 152-170.
93. Nandakumar R. Simultaneous DIF amplification and cancellation: Shiley-strut's test for DIF. J Educ Meas 1993; 30: 293-311.
94. Itzkovich M, Tripolski M, Zeilig G, Ring H, Rosentul N, Ronen J, et al. Rasch analysis of the Catz-Itzkovich spinal cord independence measure. Spinal Cord 2002; 40: 396-407. (Pubitemid 34879439)
95. Glass CA, Tesio L, Itzkovich M, Soni BM, Silva P, Mecci M, et al. Spinal cord independence measure, version iii: applicability to the UK spinal cord injured population. J Rehab Med 2009;41: 723-728.
96. Smith RM, Schumacker RE, Bush MJ. Using item mean squares to evaluate fit to the Rasch model. J Outcome Meas 1998; 2: 66-78.
97. Andrich D. Rasch models for measurement. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1988.
98. Bland JM, Altman DG. Multiple significance tests: the Bonferroni method. BMJ 1995; 310: 170.