Choo Silvana X, Stratford Paul, Richardson Julie, Bosch Jackie, Pettit Susan M, Ansley Barbara J, Harris Jocelyn E
a School of Rehabilitation Science , McMaster University , Hamilton , Canada.
b Department of Occupational Therapy , Singapore General Hospital , Singapore.
Disabil Rehabil. 2018 Dec;40(26):3177-3184. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2017.1375033. Epub 2017 Sep 10.
To determine whether there was a difference in the sensitivity to change of the subscales of the Functional Independence Measure and the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills within three different post-acute inpatient rehabilitation populations.
We conducted retrospective chart review of patients consecutively admitted to inpatient rehabilitation units, with both admission and discharge Functional Independence Measure and Assessment of Motor and Process Skills scores. A total of 276 participants were included and categorized into diagnostic groups (orthopedic, oncology, and geriatric). Within group, sensitivity to change was evaluated for the subscales of each measure by calculating the difference in standardized response means (SRM) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).
The Functional Independence Measure motor subscale was more sensitive to change than the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills in the orthopedic and geriatric groups (SRM = 1.53 [95% CI 0.93, 2.3] and 0.65 [95% CI 0.3, 1.02], respectively) but not in the oncology group (SRM = 0.42 [95% CI -0.2, 1.04]). For the cognitive subscales, the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills was more sensitive to change than the Functional Independence Measure in all three groups (SRM = 0.38 [95% CI 004, 0.74], 0.65 [95% CI 0.45, 0.90], and 1.15 [95% CI 0.77, 1.69] for orthopedic, geriatric, and oncology, respectively).
The Functional Independence Measure is a mandated measure for all rehabilitation units in Canada. As the cognitive subscale of the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills is more sensitive to change than the Functional Independence Measure, we recommend also administering the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills to better detect changes in the cognitive aspect of function. Implications for rehabilitation When deciding between the Functional Independence Measure or the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills, it is important to consider whether patients' functional status is expected to change similarly or differently. The difference in sensitivity to change between the subscales of the two outcome measures varies with the characteristics of change (similar or different) in patients' functional status. We recommend using the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills, along with the Functional Independence Measure, for patients who are expected to make similar amounts of change in functional status, as the cognitive subscale of the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills is more sensitive to change and can better detect changes in the cognitive aspect of functioning. For patients whose functional status are expected to change differently (diverse diagnoses), the Functional Independence Measure may be more useful as the motor subscale was more sensitive to change when comparing between rehabilitation populations.
确定在三种不同的急性后期住院康复人群中,功能独立性测量量表和运动与过程技能评估量表各子量表对变化的敏感性是否存在差异。
我们对连续入住住院康复单元的患者进行了回顾性病历审查,收集了入院和出院时的功能独立性测量量表及运动与过程技能评估量表得分。共纳入276名参与者,并将其分为诊断组(骨科、肿瘤和老年组)。在组内,通过计算标准化反应均值(SRM)的差异和95%置信区间(CI),对每个量表的子量表的变化敏感性进行评估。
在骨科和老年组中,功能独立性测量量表的运动子量表对变化比运动与过程技能评估量表更敏感(SRM分别为1.53 [95% CI 0.93, 2.3] 和0.65 [95% CI 0.3, 1.02]),但在肿瘤组中并非如此(SRM为0.42 [95% CI -0.2, 1.04])。对于认知子量表,在所有三组中,运动与过程技能评估量表对变化比功能独立性测量量表更敏感(骨科、老年和肿瘤组的SRM分别为0.38 [95% CI 0.04, 0.74]、0.65 [95% CI 0.45, 0.90] 和1.15 [95% CI 0.77, 1.69])。
功能独立性测量量表是加拿大所有康复单元的法定测量量表。由于运动与过程技能评估量表的认知子量表对变化比功能独立性测量量表更敏感,我们建议同时使用运动与过程技能评估量表,以更好地检测功能认知方面的变化。康复的启示 在决定使用功能独立性测量量表还是运动与过程技能评估量表时,重要的是要考虑患者的功能状态预期变化是相似还是不同。两种结果测量量表各子量表对变化的敏感性差异随患者功能状态变化的特征(相似或不同)而有所不同。对于预期功能状态变化量相似的患者,我们建议同时使用运动与过程技能评估量表和功能独立性测量量表,因为运动与过程技能评估量表的认知子量表对变化更敏感,能更好地检测功能认知方面的变化。对于预期功能状态变化不同(诊断多样)的患者,功能独立性测量量表可能更有用,因为在比较不同康复人群时,其运动子量表对变化更敏感。