Chung-Ying Tsai1, Laura A Rice2, Claire Hoelmer3, Michael L Boninger4, Alicia M Koontz5. 1. Human Engineering Research Laboratories, Veterans Affairs Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA; Department of Rehabilitation Science and Technology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA. 2. Department of Kinesiology and Community Health, University of Illinois, Champaign, IL. 3. Department of Bioengineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA. 4. Human Engineering Research Laboratories, Veterans Affairs Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA; Department of Rehabilitation Science and Technology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; Department of Bioengineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA. 5. Human Engineering Research Laboratories, Veterans Affairs Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA; Department of Rehabilitation Science and Technology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA. Electronic address: akoontz@pitt.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To refine the Transfer Assessment Instrument (TAI 2.0), develop a training program for the TAI, and analyze the basic psychometric properties of the TAI 3.0, including reliability, standard error of measurement (SEM), minimal detectable change (MDC), and construct validity. DESIGN: Repeated measures. SETTING: A winter sports clinic for disabled veterans. PARTICIPANTS: Wheelchair users (N=41) who perform sitting-pivot or standing-pivot transfers. INTERVENTION: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: TAI version 3.0, intraclass correlation coefficients, SEMs, and MDCs for reliable measurement of raters' responses. Spearman correlation coefficient, 1-way analysis of variance, and independent t tests to evaluate construct validity. RESULTS: TAI 3.0 had acceptable to high levels of reliability (range, .74-.88). The SEMs for part 1, part 2, and final scores ranged from .45 to .75. The MDC was 1.5 points on the 10-point scale for the final score. There were weak correlations (ρ range, -.13 to .25; P>.11) between TAI final scores and subjects' characteristics (eg, sex, body mass index, age, type of disability, length of wheelchair use, grip and elbow strength, sitting balance). CONCLUSIONS: With comprehensive training, the refined TAI 3.0 yields high reliability among raters of different clinical backgrounds and experience. TAI 3.0 was unbiased toward certain physical characteristics that may influence transfer. TAI fills a void in the field by providing a quantitative measurement of transfers and a tool that can be used to detect problems and guide transfer training.
OBJECTIVES: To refine the Transfer Assessment Instrument (TAI 2.0), develop a training program for the TAI, and analyze the basic psychometric properties of the TAI 3.0, including reliability, standard error of measurement (SEM), minimal detectable change (MDC), and construct validity. DESIGN: Repeated measures. SETTING: A winter sports clinic for disabled veterans. PARTICIPANTS: Wheelchair users (N=41) who perform sitting-pivot or standing-pivot transfers. INTERVENTION: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: TAI version 3.0, intraclass correlation coefficients, SEMs, and MDCs for reliable measurement of raters' responses. Spearman correlation coefficient, 1-way analysis of variance, and independent t tests to evaluate construct validity. RESULTS: TAI 3.0 had acceptable to high levels of reliability (range, .74-.88). The SEMs for part 1, part 2, and final scores ranged from .45 to .75. The MDC was 1.5 points on the 10-point scale for the final score. There were weak correlations (ρ range, -.13 to .25; P>.11) between TAI final scores and subjects' characteristics (eg, sex, body mass index, age, type of disability, length of wheelchair use, grip and elbow strength, sitting balance). CONCLUSIONS: With comprehensive training, the refined TAI 3.0 yields high reliability among raters of different clinical backgrounds and experience. TAI 3.0 was unbiased toward certain physical characteristics that may influence transfer. TAI fills a void in the field by providing a quantitative measurement of transfers and a tool that can be used to detect problems and guide transfer training.
Authors: Lynn A Worobey; Christina K Zigler; Randall Huzinec; Stephanie K Rigot; JongHun Sung; Laura A Rice Journal: Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil Date: 2018
Authors: Laura A Rice; Jong Hun Sung; Kathleen Keane; Elizabeth Peterson; Jacob J Sosnoff Journal: J Spinal Cord Med Date: 2019-07-25 Impact factor: 1.985
Authors: Lynn A Worobey; Rachel Hibbs; Stephanie K Rigot; Michael L Boninger; Randall Huzinec; Jong H Sung; Laura A Rice Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2021-03-10 Impact factor: 4.060