M Aguilar-Rodríguez1, L Peña-Pachés2, C Grao-Castellote3, F Torralba-Collados3, D Hervás-Marín4, M Giner-Pascual5. 1. 1] Department of Physiotherapy, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain [2] Unit of Physiotherapy, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe, Valencia, Spain. 2. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Hospital General of Castellón, Castellon, Spain. 3. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico, La Fe, Valencia, Spain. 4. Biostatistics Unit, Health Research Institute La Fe, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe, Valencia, Spain. 5. 1] Unit of Physiotherapy, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe, Valencia, Spain [2] Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico, La Fe, Valencia, Spain.
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: This is a cross-sectional validation study. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to adapt and validate a self-report version of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM III) for the Spanish population. METHODS: A cross-cultural adaptation of the self-report version of the SCIM III for the Spanish population was performed on the basis of international guidelines. A total of 100 patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) were recruited. A team of healthcare professionals administered the SCIM III by observation. In addition, the patients completed the Spanish self-report version (eSCIM-SR). Data from both questionnaires were analysed jointly. RESULTS: A high correlation was observed between SCIM III and eSCIM-SR. Lin's concordance correlation coefficient for the global score was 0.998 (95% confidence interval: 0.997, 0.998), and the subscale scores were 0.988 (0.982, 0.992) for self-care, 0.992 (0.988, 0.995) for respiration and sphincter management and 0.997 (0.995, 0.998) for Mobility. Bland-Altman plots showed a small bias of -0.32 (95% limits of agreement: -3.01, 2.37). The estimated bias was low in all three domains, with values of -0.22 (-2.12, 1.68), -0.1 (-2.02, 1.82) and -0.03 (-1.69, 1.63) for the self-care, respiration and sphincter management and mobility subscales, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our study validates the eSCIM-SR as a tool for the functional assessment of patients with SCI, principally in the outpatient setting.
STUDY DESIGN: This is a cross-sectional validation study. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to adapt and validate a self-report version of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM III) for the Spanish population. METHODS: A cross-cultural adaptation of the self-report version of the SCIM III for the Spanish population was performed on the basis of international guidelines. A total of 100 patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) were recruited. A team of healthcare professionals administered the SCIM III by observation. In addition, the patients completed the Spanish self-report version (eSCIM-SR). Data from both questionnaires were analysed jointly. RESULTS: A high correlation was observed between SCIM III and eSCIM-SR. Lin's concordance correlation coefficient for the global score was 0.998 (95% confidence interval: 0.997, 0.998), and the subscale scores were 0.988 (0.982, 0.992) for self-care, 0.992 (0.988, 0.995) for respiration and sphincter management and 0.997 (0.995, 0.998) for Mobility. Bland-Altman plots showed a small bias of -0.32 (95% limits of agreement: -3.01, 2.37). The estimated bias was low in all three domains, with values of -0.22 (-2.12, 1.68), -0.1 (-2.02, 1.82) and -0.03 (-1.69, 1.63) for the self-care, respiration and sphincter management and mobility subscales, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our study validates the eSCIM-SR as a tool for the functional assessment of patients with SCI, principally in the outpatient setting.
Authors: V Bluvshtein; L Front; M Itzkovich; E Aidinoff; I Gelernter; J Hart; F Biering-Soerensen; C Weeks; M T Laramee; C Craven; S L Hitzig; E Glaser; G Zeilig; S Aito; G Scivoletto; M Mecci; R J Chadwick; W S El Masry; A Osman; C A Glass; P Silva; B M Soni; B P Gardner; G Savic; E M Bergström; A Catz Journal: Spinal Cord Date: 2010-09-07 Impact factor: 2.772
Authors: K D Anderson; M E Acuff; B G Arp; D Backus; S Chun; K Fisher; J E Fjerstad; D E Graves; K Greenwald; S L Groah; S J Harkema; J A Horton; M-N Huang; M Jennings; K S Kelley; S M Kessler; S Kirshblum; S Koltenuk; M Linke; I Ljungberg; J Nagy; L Nicolini; M J Roach; S Salles; W M Scelza; M S Read; R K Reeves; M D Scott; K E Tansey; J L Theis; C Z Tolfo; M Whitney; C D Williams; C M Winter; J M Zanca Journal: Spinal Cord Date: 2011-03-29 Impact factor: 2.772
Authors: Maria Jose Zarco-Periñan; María J Barrera-Chacón; Inmaculada García-Obrero; Juan Bosco Mendez-Ferrer; Luis Eduardo Alarcon; Carmen Echevarria-Ruiz de Vargas Journal: Disabil Rehabil Date: 2013-12-09 Impact factor: 3.033
Authors: Kim Anderson; Sergio Aito; Michal Atkins; Fin Biering-Sørensen; Susan Charlifue; Armin Curt; John Ditunno; Clive Glass; Ralph Marino; Ruth Marshall; Mary Jane Mulcahey; Marcel Post; Gordana Savic; Giorgio Scivoletto; Amiram Catz Journal: J Spinal Cord Med Date: 2008 Impact factor: 1.985
Authors: M J Mulcahey; Christina Calhoun Thielen; Cristina Sadowsky; Jennifer L Silvestri; Rebecca Martin; Lauren White; Julie A Cagney; Lawrence C Vogel; Jennifer Schottler; Loren Davidson; Ingrid Parry; Heather B Taylor; Kristine Higgins; Michelle L Feltz; Rebecca Sinko; Jackie Bultman; Jenny Mazurkiewicz; John Gaughan Journal: Spinal Cord Date: 2017-12-22 Impact factor: 2.772