Ranker Alexander, Gutenbrunner Christoph, Eckhardt Isabelle, Giordano Andrea, Burger Helena, Franchignoni Franco
Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Medical School Hannover, Germany.
Bioengineering Unit, Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri, IRCCS, Institute of Veruno (NO), Italy.
Int J Rehabil Res. 2021 Sep 1;44(3):233-240. doi: 10.1097/MRR.0000000000000478.
This study aimed to compare, through Rasch analysis, the psychometric properties of the Locomotor Capabilities Index (LCI-5) and Prosthetic Mobility Questionnaire (PMQ 2.0) in German lower-limb prosthesis users. The questionnaires were concurrently administered to a convenience sample of 98 consecutively recruited individuals with lower limb amputation (LLA) (male/female = 61/37; mean age 57 ± 14 years). LCI-5 showed disordered rating scale thresholds (one response option in three items required collapsing); local dependence between two items (resolved by creating a testlet); underfit of one item ('Get up from the floor'); and presence of a second weak dimension. PMQ 2.0 showed a correctly functioning rating scale; good fit of the data to the model (apart from some overfit); local dependence between two items (absorbed by creating a testlet); and essential unidimensionality. At scale co-calibration onto a common interval-scaled metric, PMQ 2.0 was better targeted than LCI-5 (i.e. the extent of item difficulty was more appropriate for the sample) and its operational range allowed a more precise measurement of higher locomotor abilities. The correlation between LCI-5 and PMQ 2.0 scores was rho = 0.78. In conclusion, LCI-5 revealed some drawbacks, confirming a previous Rasch study; refinement of its rating scale and item selection seems therefore warranted. The PMQ 2.0 demonstrated good overall measurement quality, in line with previous Italian and Slovene studies. The operational range of the PMQ 2.0 makes it more suitable than LCI-5 for assessing people with high locomotor abilities.
本研究旨在通过拉施分析,比较德国下肢假肢使用者的运动能力指数(LCI - 5)和假肢活动问卷(PMQ 2.0)的心理测量特性。这些问卷同时施用于一个便利样本,该样本由98名连续招募的下肢截肢(LLA)个体组成(男/女 = 61/37;平均年龄57 ± 14岁)。LCI - 5显示出评分量表阈值紊乱(三个项目中的一个反应选项需要合并);两个项目之间存在局部依赖性(通过创建一个测试组解决);一个项目(“从地板上站起来”)拟合不佳;以及存在第二个弱维度。PMQ 2.0显示评分量表功能正常;数据与模型拟合良好(除了一些过度拟合);两个项目之间存在局部依赖性(通过创建一个测试组吸收);以及基本单维度性。在将量表共同校准到一个共同的区间尺度度量上时,PMQ 2.0比LCI - 5的针对性更强(即项目难度程度更适合该样本),并且其操作范围允许更精确地测量较高的运动能力。LCI - 5和PMQ 2.0分数之间的相关性为rho = 0.78。总之,LCI - 5揭示了一些缺点,证实了之前的一项拉施研究;因此,对其评分量表和项目选择进行改进似乎是必要的。PMQ 2.0展示了良好的整体测量质量,与之前意大利和斯洛文尼亚的研究一致。PMQ 2.0的操作范围使其比LCI - 5更适合评估具有高运动能力的人群。