OBJECTIVE: To examine the validity, reliability and usefulness of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure for the UK spinal cord injury population. DESIGN: Multi-centre cohort study. SETTING: Four UK regional spinal cord injury centres. SUBJECTS: Eighty-six people with spinal cord injury. INTERVENTIONS: Spinal Cord Independence Measure and Functional Independence Measure on admission analysed using inferential statistics, and Rasch analysis of Spinal Cord Independence Measure. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Internal consistency, inter-rater reliability, discriminant validity; Spinal Cord Independence Measure subscale match between distribution of item difficulty and patient ability measurements; reliability of patient ability measures; fit of data to Rasch model; unidimensionality of subscales; hierarchical ordering of categories within items; differential item functioning across patient groups. RESULTS: Scale reliability (kappa coefficients range 0.491-0.835; (p < 0.001)), internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.770 and 0.780 for raters), and validity (Pearson correlation; p < 0.01) were all significant. Spinal Cord Independence Measure subscales compatible with stringent Rasch requirements; mean infit indices high; distinct strata of abilities identified; most thresholds ordered; item hierarchy stable across clinical groups and centres. Misfit and differences in item hierarchy identified. Difficulties assessing central cord injuries highlighted. CONCLUSION: Conventional statistical and Rasch analyses justify the use of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure in clinical practice and research in the UK. Cross-cultural validity may be further improved.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the validity, reliability and usefulness of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure for the UK spinal cord injury population. DESIGN: Multi-centre cohort study. SETTING: Four UK regional spinal cord injury centres. SUBJECTS: Eighty-six people with spinal cord injury. INTERVENTIONS: Spinal Cord Independence Measure and Functional Independence Measure on admission analysed using inferential statistics, and Rasch analysis of Spinal Cord Independence Measure. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Internal consistency, inter-rater reliability, discriminant validity; Spinal Cord Independence Measure subscale match between distribution of item difficulty and patient ability measurements; reliability of patient ability measures; fit of data to Rasch model; unidimensionality of subscales; hierarchical ordering of categories within items; differential item functioning across patient groups. RESULTS: Scale reliability (kappa coefficients range 0.491-0.835; (p < 0.001)), internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha 0.770 and 0.780 for raters), and validity (Pearson correlation; p < 0.01) were all significant. Spinal Cord Independence Measure subscales compatible with stringent Rasch requirements; mean infit indices high; distinct strata of abilities identified; most thresholds ordered; item hierarchy stable across clinical groups and centres. Misfit and differences in item hierarchy identified. Difficulties assessing central cord injuries highlighted. CONCLUSION: Conventional statistical and Rasch analyses justify the use of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure in clinical practice and research in the UK. Cross-cultural validity may be further improved.
Authors: H Unalan; T O Misirlioglu; B Erhan; M Akyuz; B Gunduz; E Irgi; H E Arslan; A Baltacı; S Aslan; D Palamar; A Kutlu; J Majlesi; U Akarırmak; S S Karamehmetoglu Journal: Spinal Cord Date: 2015-02-10 Impact factor: 2.772
Authors: John D Steeves; Daniel P Lammertse; John L K Kramer; Naomi Kleitman; Sukhvinder Kalsi-Ryan; Linda Jones; Armin Curt; Andrew R Blight; Kim D Anderson Journal: Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil Date: 2012-01-31