Linda Resnik1, Matthew Borgia. 1. Providence VA Medical Center, 830 Chalkstone Ave, Providence, RI 02908, USA. Linda_Resnik@Brown.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Use of outcome measures to examine outcomes of amputation is complicated by a number of factors, including ease of administration and lack of scientific evidence to guide selection and interpretation. OBJECTIVE: The purposes of this study were: (1) to estimate test-retest reliability of a modified version of the Prosthetic Evaluation Questionnaire (PEQ), scales of a version of the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire adapted for the veteran population (SF-36V), the Orthotics and Prosthetics Users' Survey (OPUS), the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS), the Two-Minute Walk Test, the Six-Minute Walk Test, the Timed "Up & Go" Test, and the Amputee Mobility Predictor; (2) to calculate minimal detectable change (MDC) of each measure; and (3) to conduct item analysis of the modified PEQ. DESIGN: This was a multi-site study with repeated measurements. METHODS: Forty-four patients with unilateral lower-limb amputation participated. Participants were tested twice within 1 week. We calculated test-retest reliability of each measure using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC [2,1]), estimated standard error of the measurement and MDC, and assessed scale score distribution. RESULTS: The study demonstrated strong test-retest reliability scores of performance measures (ICC=.83-.97) suggesting that these measures are good choices for evaluation of people with lower-limb amputation. Reliability of PEQ subscales (ICC=.41-.93) was comparable to that reported in the literature (ICC=.56-.90). LIMITATIONS: This study examined only statistically measurable differences and did not evaluate whether changes in scores were clinically important. CONCLUSIONS: Minimal detectable change scores can be used to determine whether change in test scores exceeds measurement error associated with day-to-day variation. This is the first study to present test-retest reliability data on the self-reported OPUS scales, the PSFS in people with lower-limb amputations, and a new, easier-to-use scoring mechanism for the PEQ.
BACKGROUND: Use of outcome measures to examine outcomes of amputation is complicated by a number of factors, including ease of administration and lack of scientific evidence to guide selection and interpretation. OBJECTIVE: The purposes of this study were: (1) to estimate test-retest reliability of a modified version of the Prosthetic Evaluation Questionnaire (PEQ), scales of a version of the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire adapted for the veteran population (SF-36V), the Orthotics and Prosthetics Users' Survey (OPUS), the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS), the Two-Minute Walk Test, the Six-Minute Walk Test, the Timed "Up & Go" Test, and the Amputee Mobility Predictor; (2) to calculate minimal detectable change (MDC) of each measure; and (3) to conduct item analysis of the modified PEQ. DESIGN: This was a multi-site study with repeated measurements. METHODS: Forty-four patients with unilateral lower-limb amputation participated. Participants were tested twice within 1 week. We calculated test-retest reliability of each measure using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC [2,1]), estimated standard error of the measurement and MDC, and assessed scale score distribution. RESULTS: The study demonstrated strong test-retest reliability scores of performance measures (ICC=.83-.97) suggesting that these measures are good choices for evaluation of people with lower-limb amputation. Reliability of PEQ subscales (ICC=.41-.93) was comparable to that reported in the literature (ICC=.56-.90). LIMITATIONS: This study examined only statistically measurable differences and did not evaluate whether changes in scores were clinically important. CONCLUSIONS: Minimal detectable change scores can be used to determine whether change in test scores exceeds measurement error associated with day-to-day variation. This is the first study to present test-retest reliability data on the self-reported OPUS scales, the PSFS in people with lower-limb amputations, and a new, easier-to-use scoring mechanism for the PEQ.
Authors: Jaclyn Megan Sions; Tara Jo Manal; John Robert Horne; Frank Bernard Sarlo; Ryan Todd Pohlig Journal: Physiother Theory Pract Date: 2018-06-28 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Rafael Mesquita; Sarah Wilke; Dionne E Smid; Daisy Ja Janssen; Frits Me Franssen; Vanessa S Probst; Emiel Fm Wouters; Jean Wm Muris; Fabio Pitta; Martijn A Spruit Journal: Chron Respir Dis Date: 2016-07-08 Impact factor: 2.444
Authors: Cory L Christiansen; Thomas Fields; Guy Lev; Ryan O Stephenson; Jennifer E Stevens-Lapsley Journal: PM R Date: 2015-05-12 Impact factor: 2.298
Authors: M Jason Highsmith; Jason T Kahle; Rebecca M Miro; M Elaine Cress; William S Quillen; Stephanie L Carey; Rajiv V Dubey; Larry J Mengelkoch Journal: Technol Innov Date: 2016-09-01
Authors: Shane R Wurdeman; Kendra K Schmid; Sara A Myers; Adam L Jacobsen; Nicholas Stergiou Journal: Am J Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2017-05 Impact factor: 2.159
Authors: Peter D Cox; Courtney A Frengopoulos; Susan W Hunter; C Michele Sealy; A Barry Deathe; Michael W C Payne Journal: Physiother Can Date: 2017 Impact factor: 1.037