Cargando…

The Neurological Impairment Scale: reliability and validity as a predictor of functional outcome in neurorehabilitation

PURPOSE: To examine the construct validity and inter-rater reliability of the Neurological Impairment Scale (NIS) and compare ratings by medical and multidisciplinary teams in a mixed neurorehabilitation sample. To assess its concurrent and predictive validity as a predictor of outcome and functiona...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Turner-Stokes, Lynne, Thu, Aung, Williams, Heather, Casey, Rebecca, Rose, Hilary, Siegert, Richard J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Informa UK Ltd. 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3906250/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23721497
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2013.775360
_version_ 1782301465657737216
author Turner-Stokes, Lynne
Thu, Aung
Williams, Heather
Casey, Rebecca
Rose, Hilary
Siegert, Richard J.
author_facet Turner-Stokes, Lynne
Thu, Aung
Williams, Heather
Casey, Rebecca
Rose, Hilary
Siegert, Richard J.
author_sort Turner-Stokes, Lynne
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To examine the construct validity and inter-rater reliability of the Neurological Impairment Scale (NIS) and compare ratings by medical and multidisciplinary teams in a mixed neurorehabilitation sample. To assess its concurrent and predictive validity as a predictor of outcome and functional gains during inpatient rehabilitation. METHODS: The NIS was rated in a consecutive cohort of patients (n = 428) recruited from nine specialist neurorehabilitation units in London. Dimensionality and internal consistency were explored through principal components analysis with Varimax rotation. Inter-rater reliability and the relationship between NIS and functional outcome (UK Functional Assessment Measure (FIM + FAM)) were analysed in a sub-sample (n = 94) from one centre. RESULTS: Factor analysis identified two principal domains (“Physical” and “Cognitive”) together accounting for 35% of the variance: their Cronbach’s alpha values were 0.76 and 0.67, respectively. Inter-rater reliability was excellent for overall scores between doctors (ICC = 0.95 (95% CI = 0.91–0.97)) and acceptable between the medical and multidisciplinary team (ICC = 0.92 (95% CI = 0.88–0.95)). Change in NIS-physical score predicted 29% of the variance in functional gain (FIM + FAM change). CONCLUSION: These findings provide the first formal evidence for the validity and reliability of the NIS as a measure of neurological impairment for use in general neuro-rehabilitation settings. Its further application and exploration are now warranted. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION: The extent of neurological recovery occurring during rehabilitation can make an important contribution to functional gains. In order to interpret measurement of functional outcome, we need to be able to identify changes at the level of impairment. Many of the available tools to measure severity of impairment are condition specific. The Neurological Impairment Scale (NIS) was developed for use across a broad range of disabling conditions alongside the UK FIM+FAM. This first formal examination of its psychometric properties provides evidence for its scalability, reliability and validity. The NIS has potential to provide useful information for case-mix adjustment and as a predictor of functional gain in general neurorehabilitation settings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3906250
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Informa UK Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39062502014-02-03 The Neurological Impairment Scale: reliability and validity as a predictor of functional outcome in neurorehabilitation Turner-Stokes, Lynne Thu, Aung Williams, Heather Casey, Rebecca Rose, Hilary Siegert, Richard J. Disabil Rehabil Research Paper PURPOSE: To examine the construct validity and inter-rater reliability of the Neurological Impairment Scale (NIS) and compare ratings by medical and multidisciplinary teams in a mixed neurorehabilitation sample. To assess its concurrent and predictive validity as a predictor of outcome and functional gains during inpatient rehabilitation. METHODS: The NIS was rated in a consecutive cohort of patients (n = 428) recruited from nine specialist neurorehabilitation units in London. Dimensionality and internal consistency were explored through principal components analysis with Varimax rotation. Inter-rater reliability and the relationship between NIS and functional outcome (UK Functional Assessment Measure (FIM + FAM)) were analysed in a sub-sample (n = 94) from one centre. RESULTS: Factor analysis identified two principal domains (“Physical” and “Cognitive”) together accounting for 35% of the variance: their Cronbach’s alpha values were 0.76 and 0.67, respectively. Inter-rater reliability was excellent for overall scores between doctors (ICC = 0.95 (95% CI = 0.91–0.97)) and acceptable between the medical and multidisciplinary team (ICC = 0.92 (95% CI = 0.88–0.95)). Change in NIS-physical score predicted 29% of the variance in functional gain (FIM + FAM change). CONCLUSION: These findings provide the first formal evidence for the validity and reliability of the NIS as a measure of neurological impairment for use in general neuro-rehabilitation settings. Its further application and exploration are now warranted. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION: The extent of neurological recovery occurring during rehabilitation can make an important contribution to functional gains. In order to interpret measurement of functional outcome, we need to be able to identify changes at the level of impairment. Many of the available tools to measure severity of impairment are condition specific. The Neurological Impairment Scale (NIS) was developed for use across a broad range of disabling conditions alongside the UK FIM+FAM. This first formal examination of its psychometric properties provides evidence for its scalability, reliability and validity. The NIS has potential to provide useful information for case-mix adjustment and as a predictor of functional gain in general neurorehabilitation settings. Informa UK Ltd. 2014-01 2013-05-30 /pmc/articles/PMC3906250/ /pubmed/23721497 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2013.775360 Text en © 2014 Informa UK Ltd. All rights reserved: reproduction in whole or part not permitted http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the source is credited.
spellingShingle Research Paper
Turner-Stokes, Lynne
Thu, Aung
Williams, Heather
Casey, Rebecca
Rose, Hilary
Siegert, Richard J.
The Neurological Impairment Scale: reliability and validity as a predictor of functional outcome in neurorehabilitation
title The Neurological Impairment Scale: reliability and validity as a predictor of functional outcome in neurorehabilitation
title_full The Neurological Impairment Scale: reliability and validity as a predictor of functional outcome in neurorehabilitation
title_fullStr The Neurological Impairment Scale: reliability and validity as a predictor of functional outcome in neurorehabilitation
title_full_unstemmed The Neurological Impairment Scale: reliability and validity as a predictor of functional outcome in neurorehabilitation
title_short The Neurological Impairment Scale: reliability and validity as a predictor of functional outcome in neurorehabilitation
title_sort neurological impairment scale: reliability and validity as a predictor of functional outcome in neurorehabilitation
topic Research Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3906250/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23721497
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2013.775360
work_keys_str_mv AT turnerstokeslynne theneurologicalimpairmentscalereliabilityandvalidityasapredictoroffunctionaloutcomeinneurorehabilitation
AT thuaung theneurologicalimpairmentscalereliabilityandvalidityasapredictoroffunctionaloutcomeinneurorehabilitation
AT williamsheather theneurologicalimpairmentscalereliabilityandvalidityasapredictoroffunctionaloutcomeinneurorehabilitation
AT caseyrebecca theneurologicalimpairmentscalereliabilityandvalidityasapredictoroffunctionaloutcomeinneurorehabilitation
AT rosehilary theneurologicalimpairmentscalereliabilityandvalidityasapredictoroffunctionaloutcomeinneurorehabilitation
AT siegertrichardj theneurologicalimpairmentscalereliabilityandvalidityasapredictoroffunctionaloutcomeinneurorehabilitation
AT turnerstokeslynne neurologicalimpairmentscalereliabilityandvalidityasapredictoroffunctionaloutcomeinneurorehabilitation
AT thuaung neurologicalimpairmentscalereliabilityandvalidityasapredictoroffunctionaloutcomeinneurorehabilitation
AT williamsheather neurologicalimpairmentscalereliabilityandvalidityasapredictoroffunctionaloutcomeinneurorehabilitation
AT caseyrebecca neurologicalimpairmentscalereliabilityandvalidityasapredictoroffunctionaloutcomeinneurorehabilitation
AT rosehilary neurologicalimpairmentscalereliabilityandvalidityasapredictoroffunctionaloutcomeinneurorehabilitation
AT siegertrichardj neurologicalimpairmentscalereliabilityandvalidityasapredictoroffunctionaloutcomeinneurorehabilitation