OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinimetric properties of the de Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI) in healthy, community-dwelling older adults. DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING: Retirement village and Returned and Services League (RSL) club in Melbourne, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: All participants were 65 years or older, healthy, and living within the community. The validation study included participants recruited from a retirement village (n=61), and the reliability studies included participants recruited from an RSL club and a subset of participants from the retirement village. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mobility was assessed using the DEMMI. The percentage of participants who scored the highest and lowest possible score on the DEMMI was calculated to determine whether a floor or ceiling effect occurred. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was estimated using a distribution-based method. Reliability was assessed independently and concurrently using the minimal detectable change at 90% confidence (MDC₉₀). RESULTS: Evidence of convergent and discriminant validity was obtained for the DEMMI by examining correlations with measures of related constructs, the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (r=.69) and Quality of Life Scale scores (r=.28), respectively. Participants who ambulated without a gait aid (82.62±10.63) had significantly higher (P<.0) DEMMI scores than those who ambulated with an aid (64.1±12.40), providing evidence of known groups validity. No floor or ceiling effect was identified. The MCID was 7 points. The MDC₉₀ was 13 (95% CI, 8.76-17.05) points on the 100-point scale. CONCLUSION: DEMMI scores in healthy, community-dwelling older adults are both valid and reliable. Copyright Â
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinimetric properties of the de Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI) in healthy, community-dwelling older adults. DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING: Retirement village and Returned and Services League (RSL) club in Melbourne, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: All participants were 65 years or older, healthy, and living within the community. The validation study included participants recruited from a retirement village (n=61), and the reliability studies included participants recruited from an RSL club and a subset of participants from the retirement village. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mobility was assessed using the DEMMI. The percentage of participants who scored the highest and lowest possible score on the DEMMI was calculated to determine whether a floor or ceiling effect occurred. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was estimated using a distribution-based method. Reliability was assessed independently and concurrently using the minimal detectable change at 90% confidence (MDC₉₀). RESULTS: Evidence of convergent and discriminant validity was obtained for the DEMMI by examining correlations with measures of related constructs, the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (r=.69) and Quality of Life Scale scores (r=.28), respectively. Participants who ambulated without a gait aid (82.62±10.63) had significantly higher (P<.0) DEMMI scores than those who ambulated with an aid (64.1±12.40), providing evidence of known groups validity. No floor or ceiling effect was identified. The MCID was 7 points. The MDC₉₀ was 13 (95% CI, 8.76-17.05) points on the 100-point scale. CONCLUSION: DEMMI scores in healthy, community-dwelling older adults are both valid and reliable. Copyright Â
Authors: T Braun; R-J Schulz; M Hoffmann; J Reinke; L Tofaute; C Urner; H Krämer; T Bock; N de Morton; C Grüneberg Journal: Z Gerontol Geriatr Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 1.281
Authors: J J Suijker; M van Rijn; G Ter Riet; E P Moll van Charante; S E de Rooij; B M Buurman Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2017 Impact factor: 4.075
Authors: Tobias Braun; Ralf-Joachim Schulz; Julia Reinke; Nico L van Meeteren; Natalie A de Morton; Megan Davidson; Christian Thiel; Christian Grüneberg Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2015-05-03 Impact factor: 3.921
Authors: Ann Christine Bodilsen; Henrik Hedegaard Klausen; Janne Petersen; Nina Beyer; Ove Andersen; Lillian Mørch Jørgensen; Helle Gybel Juul-Larsen; Thomas Bandholm Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-05-19 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Leanne Hassett; Maayken van den Berg; Richard I Lindley; Maria Crotty; Annie McCluskey; Hidde P van der Ploeg; Stuart T Smith; Karl Schurr; Maggie Killington; Bert Bongers; Kirsten Howard; Stephane Heritier; Leanne Togher; Maree Hackett; Daniel Treacy; Simone Dorsch; Siobhan Wong; Katharine Scrivener; Sakina Chagpar; Heather Weber; Ross Pearson; Catherine Sherrington Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2016-06-06 Impact factor: 2.692