Anne Thackeray1, Janel Hanmer2, Lan Yu2, Polly McCracken2, Robin Marcus1. 1. Department of Physical Therapy and Athletic Training, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. 2. Department of General Internal Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to link Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care (AM-PAC) Mobility and Daily Activity scales to the PROMIS Physical Function (PF) allowing for a common metric across scales. METHODS: Cross-sectional study of patients 18 years and older presenting to 1 of 8 outpatient rehabilitation clinics in southwestern Pennsylvania. Patients completed one survey with questions from the AM-PAC Daily Activity and Mobility short forms, and the PROMIS PF item bank. Using item response theory, 2 rounds of fixed-parameter calibration were performed. In the first, the AM-PAC Daily Activity and Mobility items were calibrated with 27 fixed item parameters from the PROMIS PF. Second, the AM-PAC Daily Activity items were calibrated with 11 PROMIS Upper Extremity fixed item parameters. This process uses the construct of physical function and equates AM-PAC items on the same underlying measurement scale for the PROMIS PF. RESULTS: Both scales measured a wide range of functioning and demonstrated good calibration. Data were appropriate for a fixed-parameter item response theory-based crosswalk. AM-PAC Daily Activity and Mobility raw scores were mapped onto the PROMIS PF metric. AM-PAC Daily Activity scores were also mapped onto the PROMIS PF Upper Extremity metric. CONCLUSION: Question items from the AM-PAC Daily Activity, AM-PAC Mobility, and PROMIS PF similarly measure the construct of physical function. This consistency allows for a crosswalk of AM-PAC scores onto the PROMIS PF metric. IMPACT: Crosswalk tables developed in this study allow for converting scores from the AM-PAC Daily Activity and Mobility scales to the PROMIS PF metric. This will facilitate monitoring of longitudinal change in function over time and across settings.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to link Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care (AM-PAC) Mobility and Daily Activity scales to the PROMIS Physical Function (PF) allowing for a common metric across scales. METHODS: Cross-sectional study of patients 18 years and older presenting to 1 of 8 outpatient rehabilitation clinics in southwestern Pennsylvania. Patients completed one survey with questions from the AM-PAC Daily Activity and Mobility short forms, and the PROMIS PF item bank. Using item response theory, 2 rounds of fixed-parameter calibration were performed. In the first, the AM-PAC Daily Activity and Mobility items were calibrated with 27 fixed item parameters from the PROMIS PF. Second, the AM-PAC Daily Activity items were calibrated with 11 PROMIS Upper Extremity fixed item parameters. This process uses the construct of physical function and equates AM-PAC items on the same underlying measurement scale for the PROMIS PF. RESULTS: Both scales measured a wide range of functioning and demonstrated good calibration. Data were appropriate for a fixed-parameter item response theory-based crosswalk. AM-PAC Daily Activity and Mobility raw scores were mapped onto the PROMIS PF metric. AM-PAC Daily Activity scores were also mapped onto the PROMIS PF Upper Extremity metric. CONCLUSION: Question items from the AM-PAC Daily Activity, AM-PAC Mobility, and PROMIS PF similarly measure the construct of physical function. This consistency allows for a crosswalk of AM-PAC scores onto the PROMIS PF metric. IMPACT: Crosswalk tables developed in this study allow for converting scores from the AM-PAC Daily Activity and Mobility scales to the PROMIS PF metric. This will facilitate monitoring of longitudinal change in function over time and across settings.
Authors: Stephen M Haley; Pengsheng Ni; Ronald K Hambleton; Mary D Slavin; Alan M Jette Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2006-07-11 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: David Cella; Seung W Choi; David M Condon; Ben Schalet; Ron D Hays; Nan E Rothrock; Susan Yount; Karon F Cook; Richard C Gershon; Dagmar Amtmann; Darren A DeWalt; Paul A Pilkonis; Arthur A Stone; Kevin Weinfurt; Bryce B Reeve Journal: Value Health Date: 2019-05 Impact factor: 5.725
Authors: Alan M Jette; Pengsheng Ni; Elizabeth K Rasch; Jed Appelman; M Elizabeth Sandel; Joseph Terdiman; Leighton Chan Journal: Stroke Date: 2012-02-16 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Benjamin D Schalet; Ron D Hays; Sally E Jensen; Jennifer L Beaumont; James F Fries; David Cella Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2016-03-09 Impact factor: 6.437