J N Morris1, B E Fries, S A Morris. 1. Hebrew Rehabilitation Center for Aged, HRCA Research and Training Institute, Boston, Massachusetts 02131-1097, USA. jnm@thor.hrca.harvard.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dependency in activities of daily living (ADLs) is a reality within nursing homes, and we describe ADL measurement strategies based on items in the Minimum Data Set (MDS) and the creation and distributional properties of three ADL self-performance scales and their relationship to other measures. METHODS: Information drawn from four data sets for a multistep analysis was guided by four study objectives: (1) to identify the subcomponents of ADLs that are present in the MDS battery; (2) to demonstrate how these items could be aggregated within hierarchical and additive ADL summary scales; (3) to describe the baseline and longitudinal distributional properties of these scales in a large, seven-state MDS database; and (4) to evaluate how these scales relate to two external criteria. RESULTS: Prevalence and factor structure findings for seven MDS ADL self-performance variables suggest that these items can be placed into early, middle, and late loss ADL components. Two types of summary ADL self-performance measures were created: additive and hierarchical. Distributional properties of these scales are described, as is their relationship to two external ADL criteria that have been reported in prior studies: first as an independent variable predicting staff time involved in resident care; second as a dependent variable in a study of the efficacy of two programs to improve resident functioning. CONCLUSIONS: The new ADL summary scales, based on readily available MDS data, should prove useful to clinicians, program auditors, and researchers who use the MDS functional self-performance items to determine a resident's ADL status.
BACKGROUND: Dependency in activities of daily living (ADLs) is a reality within nursing homes, and we describe ADL measurement strategies based on items in the Minimum Data Set (MDS) and the creation and distributional properties of three ADL self-performance scales and their relationship to other measures. METHODS: Information drawn from four data sets for a multistep analysis was guided by four study objectives: (1) to identify the subcomponents of ADLs that are present in the MDS battery; (2) to demonstrate how these items could be aggregated within hierarchical and additive ADL summary scales; (3) to describe the baseline and longitudinal distributional properties of these scales in a large, seven-state MDS database; and (4) to evaluate how these scales relate to two external criteria. RESULTS: Prevalence and factor structure findings for seven MDS ADL self-performance variables suggest that these items can be placed into early, middle, and late loss ADL components. Two types of summary ADL self-performance measures were created: additive and hierarchical. Distributional properties of these scales are described, as is their relationship to two external ADL criteria that have been reported in prior studies: first as an independent variable predicting staff time involved in resident care; second as a dependent variable in a study of the efficacy of two programs to improve resident functioning. CONCLUSIONS: The new ADL summary scales, based on readily available MDS data, should prove useful to clinicians, program auditors, and researchers who use the MDS functional self-performance items to determine a resident's ADL status.
Authors: J B Jobe; D M Smith; K Ball; S L Tennstedt; M Marsiske; S L Willis; G W Rebok; J N Morris; K F Helmers; M D Leveck; K Kleinman Journal: Control Clin Trials Date: 2001-08
Authors: John P Hirdes; Trevor F Smith; Terry Rabinowitz; Keita Yamauchi; Edgardo Pérez; Nancy Curtin Telegdi; Peter Prendergast; John N Morris; Naoki Ikegami; Charles D Phillips; Brant E Fries Journal: J Behav Health Serv Res Date: 2002-11 Impact factor: 1.505
Authors: Micaela Jantzi; Amy C Maher; George Ioannidis; John P Hirdes; Lora M Giangregorio; Alexandra Papaioannou Journal: Age Ageing Date: 2014-11-14 Impact factor: 10.668
Authors: Adam Simning; Jessica Orth; Jinjiao Wang; Thomas V Caprio; Yue Li; Helena Temkin-Greener Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2020-04-15 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Matthew Alcusky; Jennifer Tjia; David D McManus; Anne L Hume; Marc Fisher; Kate L Lapane Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2020-04-06 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Joshua D Niznik; Jacob N Hunnicutt; Xinhua Zhao; Maria K Mor; Florentina Sileanu; Sherrie L Aspinall; Sydney P Springer; Mary J Ersek; Walid F Gellad; Loren J Schleiden; Joseph T Hanlon; Joshua M Thorpe; Carolyn T Thorpe Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2020-02-17 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Robin L Kruse; Gregory F Petroski; David R Mehr; Jane Banaszak-Holl; Orna Intrator Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2013-10-28 Impact factor: 5.562