Validity and reliability of the FIM instrument in the inpatient burn rehabilitation population

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

Volumn 94, Issue 8, 2013, Pages 1521-1526.e4

  Gerrard, Paul ^a   Goldstein, Richard ^a   Divita, Margaret A ^b   Ryan, Colleen M ^c,d   Mix, Jacqueline ^b   Niewczyk, Paulette ^b,e   Kazis, Lewis ^f   Kowalske, Karen ^g   Zafonte, Ross ^a   Schneider, Jeffrey C ^a  

^a and Red Sox Foundation and Massachusetts General Hospital Home Base Program   (United States)

^b Uniform Data System for Medical Rehabilitation   (United States)

^c MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^d SHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN   (United States)

^e DAEMEN COLLEGE   (United States)

^f BOSTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT DALLAS   (United States)

Author keywords

Burns; Factor analysis; Outcome measures; Psychometrics; Rehabilitation; Validation

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BURN; COGNITION; CONSTRUCT VALIDITY; FACTORIAL ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL INDEPENDENCE MEASURE; HOSPITAL PATIENT; HUMAN; INTERNAL CONSISTENCY; ITEM RESPONSE THEORY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MOKKEN SCALE MODEL; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; REHABILITATION CENTER; RELIABILITY; THEORETICAL MODEL; THEORY;

EID: 84880916172     PISSN: 00039993     EISSN: 1532821X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2013.02.019     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. L. Brosseau, L. Potvin, P. Philippe, Y.-L. Boulanger, and E. Dutil The construct validity of the Functional Independence Measure as applied to stroke patients Physiother Theory Pract 12 1996 161 171 (Pubitemid 26341140)
2. L. Brosseau, and C. Wolson The inter-rater reliability and construct validity of the Functional Independence Measure of multiple sclerosis subjects Clin Rehabil 8 1994 107 115 (Pubitemid 24168361)
3. D. Kidd, G. Stewart, and J. Baldry The Functional Independence Measure: a comparative validity and reliability study Disabil Rehabil 17 1995 10 14
4. K.J. Ottenbacher, Y. Hsu, C.V. Granger, and R.C. Fiedler The reliability of the Functional Independence Measure: a quantitative review Arch Phys Med Rehabil 77 1996 1226 1232 (Pubitemid 26424833)
5. M.G. Stineman, J.A. Shea, and A. Jette The Functional Independence Measure: tests of scaling assumptions, structure, and reliability across 20 diverse impairment categories Arch Phys Med Rehabil 77 1996 1101 1108 (Pubitemid 26378626)
6. N. Williams, K. Stiller, J. Greenwood, P. Calvert, M. Masters, and S. Kavanagh Physical and quality of life outcomes of patients with isolated hand burns-a prospective audit J Burn Care Res 33 2012 188 198
7. W.H. Tan, R. Goldstein, and P. Gerrard Outcomes and predictors in burn rehabilitation J Burn Care Res 33 2012 110 117
8. The R Foundation for Statistical Computing. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Version 2.15 2012 R Foundation for Statistical Computing Vienna
9. lavaan: Latent Variable Analysis. Version 0.4-10. 2011. Ghent: Department of Data Analysis, Ghent University.
10. L.A. van der Ark New developments in Mokken scale analysis in R J Stat Softw 48 2012 1 26
11. mokken: an R package for Mokken scale analysis. Version 2.7.1. 2012. Tilburg: Department of Methodology and Statistics, Tilburg University.
12. K.-H. Yuan, and P.M. Bentler Structural equation modeling Handbk Stat 26 2007 297 358
13. K. Sijtsma, and A.C. Verweij Mokken scale analysis: theoretical considerations and an application to transitivity tasks Appl Meas Educ 5 1992 355 373
14. J. Stochl, P.B. Jones, and T.J. Croudace Mokken scale analysis of mental health and wellbeing questionnaire item responses: a nonparametric IRT method in empirical research for applied health researchers BMC Med Res Methodol 12 2012 74
15. L.A. van der Ark Mokken scale analysis in R J Stat Softw 20 2007 1 19
16. W.H. van Schuur Mokken scale analysis: between the Guttman scale and parametric item response theory Pol Analysis 11 2003 139 163
17. R.R. Meijer, and K. Sijtsma Theoretical and empirical comparison of the Mokken and the Rasch approach to IRT Appl Psychol Meas 14 1990 283 298
18. K. Sijtsma, and R.R. Meijer Nonparametric item response theory and special topics Handbk Stat 26 2007 719 746
19. R.D. Hays, L.S. Morales, and S.P. Reise Item response theory and health outcomes measurement in the 21st century Med Care 38 2000 II28 II42
20. K. Sijtsma, and R.R. Meijer A method for investigating the intersection of item response functions in Mokken's nonparametric IRT model Appl Psychol Meas 16 1992 149 157
21. B.B. Reeve, R.D. Hays, and J.B. Bjorner Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks: plans for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Med Care 45 2007 S22 S31
22. C.A. Velozo, R.T. Seel, S. Magasi, A.W. Heinemann, and S. Romero Improving measurement methods in rehabilitation: core concepts and recommendations for scale development Arch Phys Med Rehabil 93 Suppl2 2012 S154 S163
23. K. Sijtsma, and I.W. Molenaar Reliability of test scores in nonparametric item response theory Psychometrika 52 1987 79 97
24. L.J. Cronbach Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests Psychometrika 16 1951 297 334
25. P. Gerrard, C.M. Ryan, and P. Niewczyk Risk factors associated with transfer from inpatient rehabilitation to acute care in the burn population PM&R 3 2011 S259
26. P. Gerrard, R. Goldstein, and M. DiVita A scoring system for risk stratification of acute transfers from inpatient rehabilitation in the burn population J Burn Care Res 33 2 Suppl1 2012 S75
27. C.V. Granger, B.B. Hamilton, J.M. Linacre, A.W. Heinemann, and B.D. Wright Performance profiles of the Functional Independence Measure Am J Phys Med Rehabil 72 1993 84 89 (Pubitemid 23144146)
28. M.G. Stineman, R.N. Ross, R. Fiedler, C.V. Granger, and G. Maislin Functional independence staging: conceptual foundation, face validity, and empirical derivation Arch Phys Med Rehabil 84 2003 29 37 (Pubitemid 36090110)
29. M.D. Reckase The past and future of multidimensional item response theory Appl Psychol Meas 21 1997 25 36
30. P. Mair, and R. Hatzinger Extended Rasch modeling: the eRm package for the application of IRT models in R J Stat Softw 20 2007 1 20
31. M. Gomez, R. Cartotto, J. Knighton, K. Smith, and J.S. Fish Improved survival following thermal injury in adult patients treated at a regional burn center J Burn Care Res 29 2008 130 137
32. M. Jarrett, M. McMahon, and K. Stiller Physical outcomes of patients with burn injuries-a 12 month follow-up J Burn Care Res 29 2008 975 984
33. J.C. Schneider, S. Bassi, and C.M. Ryan Employment outcomes after burn injury: a comparison of those burned at work and those burned outside of work J Burn Care Res 32 2011 294 301
34. J.A. Sliwa, A. Heinemann, and P. Semik Inpatient rehabilitation following burn injury: patient demographics and functional outcomes Arch Phys Med Rehabil 86 2005 1920 1923 (Pubitemid 41423617)
35. N. Williams, K. Stiller, J. Greenwood, P. Calvert, M. Masters, and S. Kavanagh Physical and quality of life outcomes of patients with isolated hand burns-a prospective audit J Burn Care Res 33 2012 188 198
36. W.H. Tan, R. Goldstein, and P. Gerrard Outcomes and predictors in burn rehabilitation J Burn Care Res 33 2012 110 117
37. A.M. Jette Measuring subjective clinical outcomes Phys Ther 69 1989 580 584 (Pubitemid 19175459)
38. P. Gerrard, R. Goldstein, and M. DiVita A scoring system for risk stratification of acute transfers from inpatient rehabilitation in the burn population J Burn Care Res 33 2Suppl1 2012 S75
39. P. Gerrard, C.M. Ryan, and P. Niewczyk Risk factors associated with transfer from inpatient rehabilitation to acute care in the burn population PM&R 3 2011 S259
40. K.-H. Yuan, and P.M. Bentler Structural equation modeling Handbk Stat 26 2007 297 358
41. B. Zumbo Validity: foundational issues in statistical methodology Handbk Stat 26 2007 45 79
42. R.D. Bock, and I. Moutaski Item response theory in a general framework Handbk Stat 26 2007 469 513
43. L. Brosseau, L. Potvin, P. Philippe, Y.-L. Boulanger, and E. Dutil The construct validity of the Functional Independence Measure as applied to stroke patients Physiother Theory Pract 12 1996 161 171 (Pubitemid 26341140)
44. C.V. Granger, B.B. Hamilton, J.M. Linacre, A.W. Heinemann, and B.D. Wright Performance profiles of the Functional Independence Measure Am J Phys Med Rehabil 72 1993 84 89 (Pubitemid 23144146)
45. D. Kidd, G. Stewart, and J. Baldry The Functional Independence Measure: a comparative validity and reliability study Disabil Rehabil 17 1995 10 14
46. L. Brosseau, and C. Wolson The inter-rater reliability and construct validity of the Functional Independence Measure of multiple sclerosis subjects Clin Rehabil 8 1994 107 115 (Pubitemid 24168361)
47. K.J. Ottenbacher, Y. Hsu, C.V. Granger, and R.C. Fiedler The reliability of the Functional Independence Measure: a quantitative review Arch Phys Med Rehabil 77 1996 1226 1232 (Pubitemid 26424833)
48. R. Ligtvoet, L.A. van der Ark, J.M. te Marvelde, and K. Sijtsma Investigating an invariant item ordering for polytomously scored items Educ Psychol Meas 70 2010 578 595
49. G.R. Norman, J.A. Sloan, and K.W. Wyrwich Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation Med Care 41 2003 582 592