Abstract
Abstract
Background
Since the number of persons diagnosed with multi-morbidity is increasing, there is a need for generic instruments to be able to assess, measure and compare ADL ability across diagnoses. Accordingly, the ADL-Interview (ADL-I) was developed to be used in rehabilitation research and clinical practice. The aim of this study was to investigate if the ADL-I can be used to provide valid and reliable ADL ability measures across gender and diagnostic groups.
Methods
ADL-I data were extracted from an existing research database on persons with chronic conditions including medical, rheumatological, oncological, neurological, geriatric and psychiatric diagnoses. Data were analysed based on Rasch Measurement methods to examine: the psychometric properties of the rating scale; ADL item and person fit to the Rasch model; if the difficulty of the ADL tasks differs across gender and diagnostic groups, and if the ADL-I provides precise and reliable measures of ADL ability.
Results
Data on n = 2098 persons were included in the final analysis. Initial evaluation of the 0–3 rating scale revealed threshold disordering between categories 1 and 2. After removal of 16 underfitting items, the variance explained by the Rasch dimension increased from 54.3 to 58.0%, thresholds were ordered, but the proportion of persons with misfitting ADL-I measures increased slightly from 8.7 to 9.1%. The person separation index improved slightly from 2.75 to 2.99 (reliability = 0.90). Differential test function analysis, however, supported that the 16 underfitting items did not represent a threat to the measurement system. Similarly, ADL items displaying differential item functioning across gender and diagnoses did not represent a threat to the measurement system. The ADL items and participants were well distributed along the scale, with item and person measures well targeted to each other, indicating a small ceiling effect and no floor effect.
Conclusions
The study results overall suggest that the ADL-I is producing valid and reliable measures across gender and diagnostic groups among persons within a broad range of ADL ability, providing evidence to support generic use of the ADL-I.
Trial registration
N/A.
Funder
the danish association of occupational therapists
oak foundation
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,General Medicine
Reference58 articles.
1. Avlund K, Schultz-Larsen K, Kreiner S. The measurement of instrumental ADL: content validity and construct validity. Aging (Milano). 1993;5:371–83.
2. Wade D. Rehabilitation—a new approach. Part four: a new paradigm, and its implications. Clin Rehabil. 2016;30(2):109–18.
3. Mahoney F, Barthel D. Functional evaluation: the Barthel Index. Md State Med J. 1965;14:61–5.
4. Kidd D, Stewart G, Baldry J, Johnson J, Rossiter D, Petruckevitch A, et al. The functional Independence measure: a comparative validity and reliability study. Disabil Rehabil. 1995;17(1):10–4.
5. Fisher A, Jones K. Assessment of Motor and Process Skills: development, standardization, and administration manual. Seventh edition, revised ed. Fort Collins: Three Star Press, Inc.; 2012.
Cited by
9 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献