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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |