Comparing the Functional Independence Measure and the interRAI/MDS for use in the functional assessment of older adults: A review of the literature

被引：44
作者：
Glenny C. [1 ]
Stolee P. [1 ]
机构：
[1] Department of Health Studies and Gerontology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo (N2L 3G1)
来源：
BMC Geriatrics | / 9卷 / 1期
关键词：
Differential Item Functioning; Nursing Home Resident; Inpatient Rehabilitation; Functional Independence Measure; Intrarater Reliability;
D O I：
10.1186/1471-2318-9-52
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
Background. The rehabilitation of older persons is often complicated by increased frailty and medical complexity - these in turn present challenges for the development of health information systems. Objective investigation and comparison of the effectiveness of geriatric rehabilitation services requires information systems that are comprehensive, reliable, valid, and sensitive to clinically relevant changes in older persons. The Functional Independence Measure is widely used in rehabilitation settings - in Canada this is used as the central component of the National Rehabilitation Reporting System of the Canadian Institute of Health Information. An alternative system has been developed by the interRAI consortium. We conducted a literature review to compare the development and measurement properties of these two systems. Methods. English language literature published between 1983 (initial development of the FIM) and 2008 was searched using Medline and CINAHL databases, and the reference lists of retrieved articles. Relevant articles were summarized and charted using the criteria proposed by Streiner. Additionally, attention was paid to the ability of the two systems to address issues particularly relevant to older rehabilitation clients, such as medical complexity, comorbidity, and responsiveness to small but clinically meaningful improvements. Results. In total, 66 articles were found that met the inclusion criteria. The majority of FIM articles studied inpatient rehabilitation settings; while the majority of interRAI/MDS articles focused on nursing home settings. There is evidence supporting the reliability of both instruments. There were few articles that investigated the construct validity of the interRAI/MDS. Conclusion. Additional psychometric research is needed on both the FIM and MDS, especially with regard to their use in different settings and with different client groups. © 2009 Glenny and Stolee; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 103 条
[31]  
Phillips C.D., Morris J.N., The potential for using administrative and clinical data to analyze outcomes for the cognitively impaired: An assessment of the minimum data set for nursing homes, Alzheimer Disease and Associated Disorders, 11, SUPPL. 6, pp. 62-167, (1997)
[32]  
Landi F., Tua E., Onder G., Carrara B., Sgadari A., Rinaldi C., Gambassi G., Lattanzio F., Bernabei R., Minimum data set for home care: A valid instrument to assess frail older people living in the community, Medical Care, 38, 12, pp. 1184-1190, (2000)
[33]  
Morris J.N., Fries B.E., Mehr D.R., Hawes C., Phillips C., Mor V., Lipsitz L.A., MDS cognitive performance scale, Journal of Gerontology, 49, 4, pp. 13174-82, (1994)
[34]  
Hartmaier S.L., Sloane P.D., Guess H.A., Koch G.G., Mitchell C.M., Phillips C.D., Validation of the minimum data set cognitive performance scale: Agreement with the mini-mental state examination, The Journals of Gerontology. Series A, Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, 50, 2, pp. 13128-33, (1995)
[35]  
Folstein M.F., Folstein S.E., McHugh P.R., Mini-mental state": A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician, J Psychiatr Res, 12, pp. 189-98, (1975)
[36]  
Albert M., Cohen C., The test for severe impairment: An instrument for the assessment of patients with severe cognitive dysfunction, J Am Geriatr Soc, 40, pp. 449-53, (1992)
[37]  
Reisberg B., Ferris S.H., De Leon M.J., Crook T., Global deterioration scale (GDS), Psychopharmacol Bull, 24, pp. 661-663, (1998)
[38]  
Streiner D.L., A checklist for evaluating the usefulness of rating scales, Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 38, pp. 140-148, (1993)
[39]  
Dallmeijer A.J., Dekker J., Roorda L.D., Knol D.L., Van Baalen B., De Groot V., Schepers V., Lankhorst G.J., Differential item functioning of the functional independence measure in higher performing neurological patients, Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine: Official Journal of the UEMS European Board of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, 37, 6, pp. 346-352, (2005)
[40]  
Daving Y., Andren E., Nordholm L., Grimby G., Reliability of an interview approach to the functional independence measure, Clinical Rehabilitation, 15, 3, pp. 301-310, (2001)
12345678910