Construct Validity of the Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility (PLUS-M) in Adults With Lower Limb Amputation

Objective: To assess construct validity of the Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility (PLUS-M), a self-report mobility measure for people with lower limb amputation (LLA). Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: Private prosthetic clinics (n=37). Participants: Current lower limb prosthesis users (N=199; mean age +/- SD, 55.4 +/- 14.3y; 71.4% men) were assessed before receiving a replacement prosthesis, prosthetic socket, and/or prosthetic knee. Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures: Convergent construct validity was examined using correlations between participants' PLUS-M T-scores and measures of physical function, mobility, and balance, including the Amputee Mobility Predictor (AMP), timed Up and Go (TUG), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire-Mobility Subscale (PEQ-MS), and Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale. Known-groups construct validity was evaluated by comparing differences in PLUS-M T-scores among participants grouped by Medicare Functional Classification Level (MFCL). Results: PLUS-M T-scores demonstrated a moderate positive relationship with AMP scores (rho=-.54, P<.001) and a moderate negative relationship with TUG times (rho=.56, P<.001). The PLUS-M also showed a strong positive relationship with PEQ-MS scores (rho =.78, P<.001), ABC Scale scores (rho = .81, P<001), and PROMIS-PF T-scores (rho = .81, P<.001). Significant differences (P<.05) in PLUS-M T-scores were found among groups of people classified by different MFCLs. Conclusions: Study results support the validity of the PLUS-M as a self-report measure of prosthetic mobility. Correlations between PLUS-M and measures of physical function, mobility, and balance indicate convergent construct validity. Similarly, significant differences in PLUS-M T-scores across MFCL, groups provide evidence of known-groups construct validity. In summary, evidence indicates that PLUS-M has good construct validity among people with LLA. (C) 2016 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine