Literature DB >> 17896048

Interpreting rehabilitation outcome measurements.

Alan M Jette1, Wei Tao, Anna Norweg, Stephen Haley.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: With the increased use of standardized outcome instruments in rehabilitation, questions frequently arise as to how to interpret the scores that are derived from these standardized outcome instruments. This article uses examples drawn from the Activity Measure for Post Acute Care to illustrate 4 different data analysis and presentation strategies that can be used to yield meaningful outcome data for use in rehabilitation research and practice.
DESIGN: A prospective cohort study in patients recruited at the point of discharge from a large acute care hospital or on admission to 1 of 2 rehabilitation hospitals after discharge from an acute care hospital in the greater Boston, MA region. SAMPLE: A total of 516 subjects in the Rehabilitation Outcome Study.
RESULTS: Four distinct approaches to analyzing and reporting outcome data are described to derive more meaningful outcome measurements: interpreting a single scale score; interpreting clinical significance of score changes; a percentile ranking method; and a functional staging approach. The first 3 methods focus on interpreting the numeric property of individual measurements and are best suited to assess individual outcomes and for detecting change. The fourth, a functional staging approach, provides an attractive feature of interpreting the clinical meaning provided by a particular quantitative score without sacrificing the inherent value of a quantitative scale for tracking change over time.
CONCLUSION: Users are encouraged to consider the range of analysis and presentation strategies available to them to evaluate a standardized scale score, both from a quantitative and a content perspective.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17896048     DOI: 10.2340/16501977-0119

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Rehabil Med        ISSN: 1650-1977            Impact factor:   2.912


  20 in total

1.  Interpreting physical and behavioral health scores from new work disability instruments.

Authors:  Elizabeth E Marfeo; Pengsheng Ni; Leighton Chan; Elizabeth K Rasch; Christine M McDonough; Diane E Brandt; Kara Bogusz; Alan M Jette
Journal:  J Rehabil Med       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 2.912

Review 2.  The promise of mHealth: daily activity monitoring and outcome assessments by wearable sensors.

Authors:  Bruce H Dobkin; Andrew Dorsch
Journal:  Neurorehabil Neural Repair       Date:  2011 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.919

3.  Clinical interpretation of the Spinal Cord Injury Functional Index (SCI-FI).

Authors:  Denise Fyffe; Claire Z Kalpakjian; Mary Slavin; Pamela Kisala; Pengsheng Ni; Steven C Kirshblum; David S Tulsky; Alan M Jette
Journal:  J Spinal Cord Med       Date:  2016-02-05       Impact factor: 1.985

4.  A multidimensional computer adaptive test approach to dyspnea assessment.

Authors:  Anna Norweg; Pengsheng Ni; Eric Garshick; George O'Connor; Kira Wilke; Alan M Jette
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 3.966

5.  Improving Outcomes for Critically Ill Cardiovascular Patients Through Increased Physical Therapy Staffing.

Authors:  Joshua K Johnson; Bryan Lohse; Haley A Bento; Christopher S Noren; Robin L Marcus; Joseph E Tonna
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2018-08-30       Impact factor: 3.966

6.  Test-retest reliability of pulse wave velocity in individuals with chronic spinal cord injury.

Authors:  Masae Miyatani; Kei Masani; Cameron Moore; Maggie Szeto; Maggie Szato; Paul Oh; Catharine Craven
Journal:  J Spinal Cord Med       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 1.985

7.  A phase IIA randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial to study the efficacy and safety of the selective androgen receptor modulator (SARM), MK-0773 in female participants with sarcopenia.

Authors:  D A Papanicolaou; S N Ather; H Zhu; Y Zhou; J Lutkiewicz; B B Scott; J Chandler
Journal:  J Nutr Health Aging       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 4.075

Review 8.  Progressive Staging of Pilot Studies to Improve Phase III Trials for Motor Interventions.

Authors:  Bruce H Dobkin
Journal:  Neurorehabil Neural Repair       Date:  2009 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.919

9.  Interpreting Life Impact Burn Recovery Evaluation Profile Scores for Use by Clinicians, Burn Survivors, and Researchers.

Authors:  Mary D Slavin; Colleen M Ryan; Jeffrey C Schneider; Amy Acton; Flor Amaya; Cayla Saret; Emily Ohrtman; Audrey Wolfe; Pengsheng Ni; Lewis E Kazis
Journal:  J Burn Care Res       Date:  2021-02-03       Impact factor: 1.845

10.  Cognitive Processing Speed Impairment Does Not Influence the Construct Validity of Six-Spot Step Test Performance in People With Multiple Sclerosis.

Authors:  Brian M Sandroff; Stephanie L Silveira; Jessica F Baird; Trinh Huynh; Robert W Motl
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2021-02-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.