Signe Hulsbæk1, Rikke Faebo Larsen1, Susanne Rosthøj2, Morten Tange Kristensen3. 1. a Department of Occupational Therapy and Physiotherapy , Zealand University Hospital , Køge , Denmark. 2. b Department of Biostatistics , University of Copenhagen , Copenhagen , Denmark. 3. c Department of Physical Therapy and Orthopedic Surgery, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Research - Copenhagen (PMR-C) , Amager-Hvidovre Hospital, University of Copenhagen , Copenhagen , Denmark.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine clinimetric properties of the de Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI) in patients with hip fracture in comparison with the modified Barthel Index (BI), Cumulated Ambulation Score (CAS), and 30-s Chair Stand Test (30-s CST). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred and twenty two patients with a hip fracture admitted to a geriatric ward following surgery were assessed on day 1 and at discharge (mean of 9 [SD 5.1] post-surgery days). RESULTS: Ninety eight percent and 89% of patients were not able to perform the 30-s CST at baseline and at discharge (large floor effect), respectively. Corresponding floor effects were 39% and 31% for DEMMI, 12% and 5% for BI, and 22% and 6%, respectively, for CAS. Convergent validity was strong between DEMMI and CAS (r = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.69-0.81), and moderate between DEMMI and BI (r = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.48-0.66) and CAS and BI (r = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.39-0.59). Responsiveness, as indicated by the effect size was 0.76 for DEMMI, 1.78 for BI and 1.04 for CAS. Baseline scores of DEMMI, BI, and CAS showed similar properties in predicting discharge destination of patients from own home. CONCLUSIONS: The value of using DEMMI and 30-s CST in patients with hip fracture during the acute hospitalization seems limited in comparison with BI and CAS. DEMMI and CAS seem to assess similar constructs. Implications for Rehabilitation Outcome measures used for the evaluation of patients with hip fracture should be validated in the specific time-line and rehabilitation setting following surgery, before being implemented in daily clinical practice. We suggest the Cumulated Ambulation Score for monitoring basic mobility during the acute hospitalization for the entire group of patients recovering from a hip fracture, while DEMMI seems more feasible for the subgroup of patients with higher functional levels. The modified Barthel Index seems useful for the assessment of activities of daily living in the acute care setting of patients with hip fracture. We cannot recommend the original 30-s Chair Stand Test to be used for the evaluation of patients with hip fracture in the acute hospital setting.
PURPOSE: To examine clinimetric properties of the de Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI) in patients with hip fracture in comparison with the modified Barthel Index (BI), Cumulated Ambulation Score (CAS), and 30-s Chair Stand Test (30-s CST). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred and twenty two patients with a hip fracture admitted to a geriatric ward following surgery were assessed on day 1 and at discharge (mean of 9 [SD 5.1] post-surgery days). RESULTS: Ninety eight percent and 89% of patients were not able to perform the 30-s CST at baseline and at discharge (large floor effect), respectively. Corresponding floor effects were 39% and 31% for DEMMI, 12% and 5% for BI, and 22% and 6%, respectively, for CAS. Convergent validity was strong between DEMMI and CAS (r = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.69-0.81), and moderate between DEMMI and BI (r = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.48-0.66) and CAS and BI (r = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.39-0.59). Responsiveness, as indicated by the effect size was 0.76 for DEMMI, 1.78 for BI and 1.04 for CAS. Baseline scores of DEMMI, BI, and CAS showed similar properties in predicting discharge destination of patients from own home. CONCLUSIONS: The value of using DEMMI and 30-s CST in patients with hip fracture during the acute hospitalization seems limited in comparison with BI and CAS. DEMMI and CAS seem to assess similar constructs. Implications for Rehabilitation Outcome measures used for the evaluation of patients with hip fracture should be validated in the specific time-line and rehabilitation setting following surgery, before being implemented in daily clinical practice. We suggest the Cumulated Ambulation Score for monitoring basic mobility during the acute hospitalization for the entire group of patients recovering from a hip fracture, while DEMMI seems more feasible for the subgroup of patients with higher functional levels. The modified Barthel Index seems useful for the assessment of activities of daily living in the acute care setting of patients with hip fracture. We cannot recommend the original 30-s Chair Stand Test to be used for the evaluation of patients with hip fracture in the acute hospital setting.
Entities:
Keywords:
Barthel Index; Cumulated Ambulation Score; Hip fracture; mobility assessment; outcome measures; physiotherapy; the de Morton Mobility Index