C B Baunsgaard1, H S Chhabra2, L A Harvey3, G Savic4, S A Sisto5, F Qureshi5, G Sachdev2, M Saif4, R Sharawat2, J Yeomans6, F Biering-Sørensen1. 1. Clinic for Spinal Cord Injuries, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 2. Indian Spinal Injuries Centre, New Delhi, India. 3. John Walsh Centre for Rehabilitation Research, Kolling Institute, Sydney Medical School/Northern, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 4. National Spinal Injuries Centre, Stoke Mandeville Hospital, Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust, Aylesbury, UK. 5. School of Health Technology and Management, Research and Development Park, Rehabilitation Research and Movement Performance (RRAMP) Laboratory, Stony Brook University, New York, NY, USA. 6. Spinal Injury Unit, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Psychometric study. OBJECTIVES: To determine the intra- and inter-rater reliability and content validity of the International Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) Musculoskeletal Basic Data Set (ISCIMSBDS). SETTING: Four centers with one in each of the countries in Australia, England, India and the United States of America. METHODS: A total of 117 participants with a C2 to S1 neurological level and American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale A to D injury were recruited. The median (interquartile range) time since injury was 9 years (2-29). Fifty-seven participants were assessed by the same assessor, and 60 participants were assessed by two different assessors on two different occasions to determine the intra- and inter-rater reliability, respectively. Kappa statistics or crude agreement was used to measure reliability. Content validity was assessed through focus group interviews of people with SCI and health-care professionals. RESULTS: The intra-rater reliability ranged from κ=0.62 to 1.00 and crude agreement from 75% to 100% for each of the variables on the ISCIMSBDS. The inter-rater reliability ranged from κ=-0.25 to 1.00, with a diverse crude agreement ranging from 0% to 100%. The inter-rater reliability was unsatisfactory for the following variables: 'Date of fracture', 'Fragility fractures', 'Scoliosis, method of assessment', 'Other musculoskeletal problems' and 'Do any of the above musculoskeletal challenges interfere with your activities of daily living (transfers, walking, dressing, showers, etc.)?'. Results from validity discussions implied no major suggestions for changes. CONCLUSION: Overall, the ISCIMSBDS is reliable and valid, although 5 of the 12 variables may benefit from further refinement.
STUDY DESIGN: Psychometric study. OBJECTIVES: To determine the intra- and inter-rater reliability and content validity of the International Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) Musculoskeletal Basic Data Set (ISCIMSBDS). SETTING: Four centers with one in each of the countries in Australia, England, India and the United States of America. METHODS: A total of 117 participants with a C2 to S1 neurological level and American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale A to D injury were recruited. The median (interquartile range) time since injury was 9 years (2-29). Fifty-seven participants were assessed by the same assessor, and 60 participants were assessed by two different assessors on two different occasions to determine the intra- and inter-rater reliability, respectively. Kappa statistics or crude agreement was used to measure reliability. Content validity was assessed through focus group interviews of people with SCI and health-care professionals. RESULTS: The intra-rater reliability ranged from κ=0.62 to 1.00 and crude agreement from 75% to 100% for each of the variables on the ISCIMSBDS. The inter-rater reliability ranged from κ=-0.25 to 1.00, with a diverse crude agreement ranging from 0% to 100%. The inter-rater reliability was unsatisfactory for the following variables: 'Date of fracture', 'Fragility fractures', 'Scoliosis, method of assessment', 'Other musculoskeletal problems' and 'Do any of the above musculoskeletal challenges interfere with your activities of daily living (transfers, walking, dressing, showers, etc.)?'. Results from validity discussions implied no major suggestions for changes. CONCLUSION: Overall, the ISCIMSBDS is reliable and valid, although 5 of the 12 variables may benefit from further refinement.
Authors: F Biering-Sørensen; M S Alexander; S Burns; S Charlifue; M DeVivo; V Dietz; A Krassioukov; R Marino; V Noonan; M W M Post; T Stripling; L Vogel; P Wing Journal: Spinal Cord Date: 2010-11-09 Impact factor: 2.772
Authors: J E Reznik; E Biros; R Marshall; M Jelbart; S Milanese; S Gordon; M P Galea Journal: J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 2.041
Authors: E Widerström-Noga; F Biering-Sørensen; T N Bryce; D D Cardenas; N B Finnerup; M P Jensen; J S Richards; P J Siddall Journal: Spinal Cord Date: 2014-01-28 Impact factor: 2.772
Authors: William C Logan; Richard Sloane; Kenneth W Lyles; Barry Goldstein; Helen M Hoenig Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: F Biering-Sørensen; A S Burns; A Curt; L A Harvey; M Jane Mulcahey; P W Nance; A M Sherwood; S A Sisto Journal: Spinal Cord Date: 2012-09-04 Impact factor: 2.772