J Bonavita1, M Torre2,3, S China1, F Bressi4, E Bonatti1, R Capirossi1, S Tiberti2, S Olivi1, G Musumeci1, E Maietti1, C Fekete5, I Baroncini1, M W G Brinkhof5,6, M Molinari2,3, G Scivoletto2,3. 1. Montecatone Rehabilitation Institute, Imola, Italy. 2. Spinal Unit, IRCCS S. Lucia Foundation, Rome, Italy. 3. Spinal Rehabilitation (SpiRe) Laboratory, IRCCS S. Lucia Foundation, Rome, Italy. 4. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Università Campus Bio-Medico, Rome, Italy. 5. Swiss Paraplegic Research, Nottwil, Switzerland. 6. Department of Health Sciences and Health Policy, University of Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland.
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional validation study. OBJECTIVES: To validate the Italian version of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure Self-Report (SCIM SR). SETTING: Two spinal cord injury (SCI) rehabilitation facilities in Italy. METHODS: The SCIM III comprises items on 19 daily tasks, grouped into three subscales: 'Self-care,' 'Respiration and sphincter management' and 'Mobility'. The total SCIM score ranges between 0 and 100. The Italian self-reported version (SCIM SR) was translated from the German tool. We studied 116 patients on their first hospitalization for rehabilitation after an SCI. At the time of discharge, patients were evaluated by the rehabilitation team using the SCIM III and self-assessed their independence with regard to activities of daily living using the SCIM SR. Pearson's correlation, Bland-Altman method, and stratified and regression analyses were used to examine the differences between evaluations. RESULTS: On the basis of Pearson's correlation, there was good agreement between the data from the SCIM III and SCIM SR (r=0.918 for 'Self-care,' 0.806 for 'Respiration and sphincter management,' 0.906 for 'Mobility' and 0.934 for total scores). By Bland-Altman analysis, patients rated their functioning nearly the same as professionals-the mean difference between SCIM III and SCIM SR scores was approximately 0 for all subscales and total scores. The stratified and regression analyses failed to identify any specific factor that was associated with differences between SCIM III and SCIM SR scores. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the validity of the Italian version of the SCIM SR, which can facilitate longer-term evaluations of the independence of individuals with SCIs.
STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional validation study. OBJECTIVES: To validate the Italian version of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure Self-Report (SCIM SR). SETTING: Two spinal cord injury (SCI) rehabilitation facilities in Italy. METHODS: The SCIM III comprises items on 19 daily tasks, grouped into three subscales: 'Self-care,' 'Respiration and sphincter management' and 'Mobility'. The total SCIM score ranges between 0 and 100. The Italian self-reported version (SCIM SR) was translated from the German tool. We studied 116 patients on their first hospitalization for rehabilitation after an SCI. At the time of discharge, patients were evaluated by the rehabilitation team using the SCIM III and self-assessed their independence with regard to activities of daily living using the SCIM SR. Pearson's correlation, Bland-Altman method, and stratified and regression analyses were used to examine the differences between evaluations. RESULTS: On the basis of Pearson's correlation, there was good agreement between the data from the SCIM III and SCIM SR (r=0.918 for 'Self-care,' 0.806 for 'Respiration and sphincter management,' 0.906 for 'Mobility' and 0.934 for total scores). By Bland-Altman analysis, patients rated their functioning nearly the same as professionals-the mean difference between SCIM III and SCIM SR scores was approximately 0 for all subscales and total scores. The stratified and regression analyses failed to identify any specific factor that was associated with differences between SCIM III and SCIM SR scores. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the validity of the Italian version of the SCIM SR, which can facilitate longer-term evaluations of the independence of individuals with SCIs.
Authors: Caroline B Terwee; Sandra D M Bot; Michael R de Boer; Daniëlle A W M van der Windt; Dirk L Knol; Joost Dekker; Lex M Bouter; Henrica C W de Vet Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2006-08-24 Impact factor: 6.437
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: A Catz; M Itzkovich; L Tesio; F Biering-Sorensen; C Weeks; M T Laramee; B C Craven; M Tonack; 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; V Bluvshtein; J Ronen Journal: Spinal Cord Date: 2006-08-15 Impact factor: 2.772
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: Alessio Conti; Marco Clari; Maeve Nolan; Eva Wallace; Marco Tommasini; Silvia Mozzone; Sara Campagna Journal: Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil Date: 2019
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
Authors: Anna Berardi; Giovanni Galeoto; Domenico Guarino; Maria Auxiliadora Marquez; Rita De Santis; Donatella Valente; Giulia Caporale; Marco Tofani Journal: Spinal Cord Ser Cases Date: 2019-05-29