Lower extremity prosthetic mobility: A comparison of 3 self-report scales

被引:109
|
作者
Miller, WC
Deathe, AB
Speechley, M
机构
[1] Univ British Columbia, Fac Med, Sch Rehabil Sci, Vancouver, BC V6T 2B5, Canada
[2] Univ Western Ontario, Dept Phys Med & Rehabil, London, ON, Canada
[3] Univ Western Ontario, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, London, ON, Canada
来源
关键词
amputees; artificial limbs; leg; psychometrics; rehabilitation; reproducibility of results;
D O I
10.1053/apmr.2001.25987
中图分类号
R49 [康复医学];
学科分类号
100215 ;
摘要
Objective: To assess and compare the reliability and validity of the Houghton Scale, the Prosthetic Profile of the Amputee Locomotor Capabilities Index (PPA-LCI), and the Prosthetic Evaluation Questionnaire (PEQ) mobility subscale, 3 disease-specific self-report measures of functional mobility for lower extremity prosthetic mobility. Design: Four-week test-retest: 1 sample for reliability analyses, 1 sample for validity analyses. Setting: University-affiliated outpatient amputee clinic, in Ontario, Canada. Participants: Two outpatient amputee samples (sample 1 [n = 55], for reliability analysis; sample 2 [n = 329], for validity analysis). Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures: Test-retest of reliability and convergent validity of the 3 scales. Convergent validity and discriminative ability were also assessed after setting a priori hypotheses for 2 scales of walking performance, balance confidence, and other indicators of ambulatory ability. Results: The reliability of the PPA-LCI (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = .88) was slightly higher than the Houghton Scale (ICC = .85) and the PEQ mobility subscale (ICC = .77). The PPA-LCI was prone to high ceiling effects (40%) that would limit its ability to detect improvement. Evidence for convergent validity, when compared with the 2-Minute Walk Test, Timed Up and Go, and the Activity-Specific Balance Confidence Scale, was supported as hypothesized in all the scales. Each of the scales was able to discriminate between different groups for amputation cause, walking distance, mobility device use, and automatism, with each having varying strength related to relative precision. The Houghton Scale was the only scale able to distinguish between amputation levels. Conclusions: Reliability and validity of all the scales are acceptable for group level comparison. None of the scales had clearly superior psychometric properties compared with the others. Further research is required to assess responsiveness.
引用
收藏
页码:1432 / 1440
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] CONVERGENT AND DISCRIMINANT VALIDITY OF SELF-REPORT DEATH SCALES
    DURLAK, JA
    KASIMATIS, MR
    OMEGA-JOURNAL OF DEATH AND DYING, 1988, 19 (02) : 163 - 174
  • [22] The Ins and Outs of Self-Report Response Options and Scales
    Froman, Robin D.
    RESEARCH IN NURSING & HEALTH, 2014, 37 (06) : 447 - 451
  • [23] Pregnancy in multiple sclerosis: clinical and self-report scales
    R. F. Neuteboom
    A. C. J. W. Janssens
    T. A. M. Siepman
    I. A. Hoppenbrouwers
    I. A. Ketelslegers
    N. Jafari
    E. A. P. Steegers
    C. J. M. de Groot
    R. Q. Hintzen
    Journal of Neurology, 2012, 259 : 311 - 317
  • [24] Issues and strategies for reducing the length of self-report scales
    Stanton, JM
    Sinar, EF
    Balzer, WK
    Smith, PC
    PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY, 2002, 55 (01) : 167 - 194
  • [25] Pregnancy in multiple sclerosis: clinical and self-report scales
    Neuteboom, R. F.
    Janssens, A. C. J. W.
    Siepman, T. A. M.
    Hoppenbrouwers, I. A.
    Ketelslegers, I. A.
    Jafari, N.
    Steegers, E. A. P.
    de Groot, C. J. M.
    Hintzen, R. Q.
    JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGY, 2012, 259 (02) : 311 - 317
  • [26] Pregnancy in multiple sclerosis: clinical and self-report scales
    Neuteboom, R. F.
    Janssens, A. C. J. W.
    Siepman, T. A. M.
    Hoppenbrouwers, I. A.
    Ketelslegers, I. A.
    Jafari, N.
    Steegers, E. A. P.
    De Groot, C. J. M.
    Hintzen, R. Q.
    MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS JOURNAL, 2011, 17 : S485 - S485
  • [27] Mobility scales for lower limb-prosthetic patient: The locomotor capabilities index
    Franchignoni, F
    Tesio, L
    Orlandini, D
    ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION, 2002, 83 (04): : 582 - 583
  • [28] Psychometric evaluation of self-report outcome measures for prosthetic applications
    Hafner, Brian J.
    Morgan, Sara J.
    Askew, Robert L.
    Salem, Rana
    JOURNAL OF REHABILITATION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, 2016, 53 (06): : 797 - 811
  • [29] COMPARISON OF 2 SELF-REPORT INVENTORIES
    BATTLE, J
    PSYCHOLOGICAL REPORTS, 1977, 41 (01) : 159 - 160
  • [30] The clarity, acceptability and relevance of self-report scales scales to screen for perinatal anxiety
    Williams, Louise
    Ayers, Susan
    Sinesi, Andrea
    Coates, Rose
    Cheyne, Helen
    Maxwell, Margaret
    JOURNAL OF REPRODUCTIVE AND INFANT PSYCHOLOGY, 2022, 40 (02) : XCVIII - XCVIII