4.5 Article

MULTIDIMENSIONAL RASCH VALIDATION OF THE FRENCHAY ACTIVITIES INDEX IN STROKE PATIENTS RECEIVING REHABILITATION

Journal

JOURNAL OF REHABILITATION MEDICINE
Volume 44, Issue 1, Pages 58-64

Publisher

FOUNDATION REHABILITATION INFORMATION
DOI: 10.2340/16501977-0911

Keywords

activities of daily living; stroke; rehabilitation; reliability and validity

Funding

  1. National Health Research Institutes [NHRI-EX100-9920PI, NHRI-EX100-10010PI]
  2. National Science Council [NSC 97-2314-B-002-008-MY3, NSC 99-2314-B-182-014-MY3]
  3. Healthy Aging Research Center at Chang Gung University [EMRPD1A0891]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To validate the dimensionality, hierarchical properties, and reliability of the Frenchay Activities Index. Design: Self-report survey of patients with stroke. Patients: A total of 127 patients provided 254 observations before and after treatments. Methods: Multidimensional Rasch model was conducted. Results: The 2-factor model showed the significantly smallest deviance and fitted the data best among 6 possible models. The 2-factor structure was stable before and after treatments, after the rating scale was revised from 4 points to 3 points. Differential item functioning relevant to the time since stroke was detected for 2 tasks. The item difficulty hierarchy of the 2 domains was determined. The correlation between the 2 domains was 0.58. The scale demonstrated acceptable ceiling and floor effects. The overall person (separation) reliability was 0.99. The reliabilities for the 2 domains were 0.81 and 0.73. Conclusion: The Frenchay Activities Index is a useful 2-dimensional scale for evaluating daily functions in stroke patients. The item difficulty hierarchy and significant differential item functioning related to the time since stroke might reflect the changes in the recovery course after stroke. The Frenchay Activities Index could be improved by adding items to capture patients with high and low levels of daily activities in domestic chores.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available