Cargando…

The Responsiveness of the Lucerne ICF-Based Multidisciplinary Observation Scale: A Comparison with the Functional Independence Measure and the Barthel Index

BACKGROUND: Good responsive functional outcome measures are important to measure change in stroke patients. The aim of study was to compare the internal and external responsiveness, floor and ceiling effects of the motor, cognition, and communication subscales of the Lucerne ICF-based Multidisciplin...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vanbellingen, Tim, Ottiger, Beatrice, Pflugshaupt, Tobias, Mehrholz, Jan, Bohlhalter, Stephan, Nef, Tobias, Nyffeler, Thomas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5035834/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27725808
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2016.00152
_version_ 1782455455559188480
author Vanbellingen, Tim
Ottiger, Beatrice
Pflugshaupt, Tobias
Mehrholz, Jan
Bohlhalter, Stephan
Nef, Tobias
Nyffeler, Thomas
author_facet Vanbellingen, Tim
Ottiger, Beatrice
Pflugshaupt, Tobias
Mehrholz, Jan
Bohlhalter, Stephan
Nef, Tobias
Nyffeler, Thomas
author_sort Vanbellingen, Tim
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Good responsive functional outcome measures are important to measure change in stroke patients. The aim of study was to compare the internal and external responsiveness, floor and ceiling effects of the motor, cognition, and communication subscales of the Lucerne ICF-based Multidisciplinary Observation Scale (LIMOS) with the motor and cognition subscales of the Functional Independence Measure (FIM), and the Barthel Index (BI), in a large cohort of stroke patients. METHODS: One hundred eighteen stroke patients participated in this study. Admission and discharge score distributions of the LIMOS motor, LIMOS cognition and communication, FIM motor and FIM cognition, and BI were analyzed based on skewness and kurtosis. Floor and ceiling effects of the scales were determined. Internal responsiveness was assessed with t-tests, effect sizes (ESs), and standardized response means (SRMs). External responsiveness was investigated with linear regression analyses. RESULTS: The LIMOS motor and LIMOS cognition and communication subscales were more responsive, expressed by higher ESs (ES = 0.65, SRM = 1.17 and ES = 0.52, SRM = 1.17, respectively) as compared with FIM motor (ES = 0.54, SRM = 0.96) and FIM cognition (ES = 0.41, SRM = 0.88) and the BI (ES = 0.41, SRM = 0.65). The LIMOS subscales showed neither floor nor ceiling effects at admission and discharge (all <15%). In contrast, ceiling effects were found for the FIM motor (16%), FIM cognition (15%) at discharge and the BI at admission (22%) and discharge (43%). LIMOS motor and LIMOS cognition and communication subscales significantly correlated (p < 0.0001) with a change in the FIM motor and FIM cognition subscales, suggesting good external responsiveness. CONCLUSION: We found that the LIMOS motor and LIMOS cognition and communication, which are ICF-based multidisciplinary standardized observation scales, might have the potential to better detect changes in functional outcome of stroke patients, compared with the FIM motor and FIM cognition and the BI.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5035834
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50358342016-10-10 The Responsiveness of the Lucerne ICF-Based Multidisciplinary Observation Scale: A Comparison with the Functional Independence Measure and the Barthel Index Vanbellingen, Tim Ottiger, Beatrice Pflugshaupt, Tobias Mehrholz, Jan Bohlhalter, Stephan Nef, Tobias Nyffeler, Thomas Front Neurol Neuroscience BACKGROUND: Good responsive functional outcome measures are important to measure change in stroke patients. The aim of study was to compare the internal and external responsiveness, floor and ceiling effects of the motor, cognition, and communication subscales of the Lucerne ICF-based Multidisciplinary Observation Scale (LIMOS) with the motor and cognition subscales of the Functional Independence Measure (FIM), and the Barthel Index (BI), in a large cohort of stroke patients. METHODS: One hundred eighteen stroke patients participated in this study. Admission and discharge score distributions of the LIMOS motor, LIMOS cognition and communication, FIM motor and FIM cognition, and BI were analyzed based on skewness and kurtosis. Floor and ceiling effects of the scales were determined. Internal responsiveness was assessed with t-tests, effect sizes (ESs), and standardized response means (SRMs). External responsiveness was investigated with linear regression analyses. RESULTS: The LIMOS motor and LIMOS cognition and communication subscales were more responsive, expressed by higher ESs (ES = 0.65, SRM = 1.17 and ES = 0.52, SRM = 1.17, respectively) as compared with FIM motor (ES = 0.54, SRM = 0.96) and FIM cognition (ES = 0.41, SRM = 0.88) and the BI (ES = 0.41, SRM = 0.65). The LIMOS subscales showed neither floor nor ceiling effects at admission and discharge (all <15%). In contrast, ceiling effects were found for the FIM motor (16%), FIM cognition (15%) at discharge and the BI at admission (22%) and discharge (43%). LIMOS motor and LIMOS cognition and communication subscales significantly correlated (p < 0.0001) with a change in the FIM motor and FIM cognition subscales, suggesting good external responsiveness. CONCLUSION: We found that the LIMOS motor and LIMOS cognition and communication, which are ICF-based multidisciplinary standardized observation scales, might have the potential to better detect changes in functional outcome of stroke patients, compared with the FIM motor and FIM cognition and the BI. Frontiers Media S.A. 2016-09-26 /pmc/articles/PMC5035834/ /pubmed/27725808 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2016.00152 Text en Copyright © 2016 Vanbellingen, Ottiger, Pflugshaupt, Mehrholz, Bohlhalter, Nef and Nyffeler. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Vanbellingen, Tim
Ottiger, Beatrice
Pflugshaupt, Tobias
Mehrholz, Jan
Bohlhalter, Stephan
Nef, Tobias
Nyffeler, Thomas
The Responsiveness of the Lucerne ICF-Based Multidisciplinary Observation Scale: A Comparison with the Functional Independence Measure and the Barthel Index
title The Responsiveness of the Lucerne ICF-Based Multidisciplinary Observation Scale: A Comparison with the Functional Independence Measure and the Barthel Index
title_full The Responsiveness of the Lucerne ICF-Based Multidisciplinary Observation Scale: A Comparison with the Functional Independence Measure and the Barthel Index
title_fullStr The Responsiveness of the Lucerne ICF-Based Multidisciplinary Observation Scale: A Comparison with the Functional Independence Measure and the Barthel Index
title_full_unstemmed The Responsiveness of the Lucerne ICF-Based Multidisciplinary Observation Scale: A Comparison with the Functional Independence Measure and the Barthel Index
title_short The Responsiveness of the Lucerne ICF-Based Multidisciplinary Observation Scale: A Comparison with the Functional Independence Measure and the Barthel Index
title_sort responsiveness of the lucerne icf-based multidisciplinary observation scale: a comparison with the functional independence measure and the barthel index
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5035834/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27725808
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2016.00152
work_keys_str_mv AT vanbellingentim theresponsivenessofthelucerneicfbasedmultidisciplinaryobservationscaleacomparisonwiththefunctionalindependencemeasureandthebarthelindex
AT ottigerbeatrice theresponsivenessofthelucerneicfbasedmultidisciplinaryobservationscaleacomparisonwiththefunctionalindependencemeasureandthebarthelindex
AT pflugshaupttobias theresponsivenessofthelucerneicfbasedmultidisciplinaryobservationscaleacomparisonwiththefunctionalindependencemeasureandthebarthelindex
AT mehrholzjan theresponsivenessofthelucerneicfbasedmultidisciplinaryobservationscaleacomparisonwiththefunctionalindependencemeasureandthebarthelindex
AT bohlhalterstephan theresponsivenessofthelucerneicfbasedmultidisciplinaryobservationscaleacomparisonwiththefunctionalindependencemeasureandthebarthelindex
AT neftobias theresponsivenessofthelucerneicfbasedmultidisciplinaryobservationscaleacomparisonwiththefunctionalindependencemeasureandthebarthelindex
AT nyffelerthomas theresponsivenessofthelucerneicfbasedmultidisciplinaryobservationscaleacomparisonwiththefunctionalindependencemeasureandthebarthelindex
AT vanbellingentim responsivenessofthelucerneicfbasedmultidisciplinaryobservationscaleacomparisonwiththefunctionalindependencemeasureandthebarthelindex
AT ottigerbeatrice responsivenessofthelucerneicfbasedmultidisciplinaryobservationscaleacomparisonwiththefunctionalindependencemeasureandthebarthelindex
AT pflugshaupttobias responsivenessofthelucerneicfbasedmultidisciplinaryobservationscaleacomparisonwiththefunctionalindependencemeasureandthebarthelindex
AT mehrholzjan responsivenessofthelucerneicfbasedmultidisciplinaryobservationscaleacomparisonwiththefunctionalindependencemeasureandthebarthelindex
AT bohlhalterstephan responsivenessofthelucerneicfbasedmultidisciplinaryobservationscaleacomparisonwiththefunctionalindependencemeasureandthebarthelindex
AT neftobias responsivenessofthelucerneicfbasedmultidisciplinaryobservationscaleacomparisonwiththefunctionalindependencemeasureandthebarthelindex
AT nyffelerthomas responsivenessofthelucerneicfbasedmultidisciplinaryobservationscaleacomparisonwiththefunctionalindependencemeasureandthebarthelindex