Clinical Rehabilitation

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nyein, K.
Right arrow Articles by Turner-Stokes, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Nyein, K.
Right arrow Articles by Turner-Stokes, L.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 13, No. 1, 56-63 (1999)
DOI: 10.1191/026921599701532135

Can a Barthel score be derived from the FIM?

Kyaw Nyein

Linsey Mcmichael

Lynne Turner-Stokes

Regional Rehabilitation Unit, Northwick Park Hospital, London, UK

Objective: To establish whether a Barthel score derived by translation from the motor items of the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) would equate to the directly scored measure.

Design: Conversion criteria for motor item scores on the FIM scale to Barthel scores were first developed. To test these criteria, 40 consecutive patients were assessed for Barthel and FIM scores by the multidisciplinary team who were unaware of the conversion criteria. The derived Barthel score was compared with the directly scored Barthel Index.

Results: A very high degree of correlation was observed between total scores of the direct and derived Barthel (Spearman's rho = 0.99), which is highly significant, and no significant differences were seen between scores for any of the individual items (Wilcoxon signed rank test). Item by item analysis across the study population was undertaken to confirm the conversion criteria. Absolute agreement between the two methods ranged from 75 to 100% and kappa values from 0.53 to 1.0.

Conclusions: This study demonstrates that a Barthel Index can be derived from the motor items of the FIM and there is a good agreement with the directly assessed Barthel score. Although a larger study may help to delineate the exact conversion criteria for one item, the current system provides an accurate and usable translation of the total score and serves as a major step towards achieving a common language in outcome measurement for rehabilitation.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Clin RehabilHome page
A. Skinner and L. Turner-Stokes
The use of standardized outcome measures in rehabilitation centres in the UK
Clinical Rehabilitation, July 1, 2006; 20(7): 609 - 615.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurol. Neurosurg. PsychiatryHome page
L Turner-Stokes, S Paul, and H Williams
Efficiency of specialist rehabilitation in reducing dependency and costs of continuing care for adults with complex acquired brain injuries
J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, May 1, 2006; 77(5): 634 - 639.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Neurorehabil Neural RepairHome page
M. Stuart, C. Ryser, A. Levitt, S. Beer, J. Kesselring, S. Chard, and M. Weinrich
Stroke Rehabilitation in Switzerland versus the United States: A Preliminary Comparison
Neurorehabil Neural Repair, June 1, 2005; 19(2): 139 - 147.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Clin RehabilHome page
L. Turner-Stokes
Outcome measurement in brain injury rehabilitation - towards a common language
Clinical Rehabilitation, April 1, 1999; 13(4): 273 - 275.
[PDF]


Home page
Clin RehabilHome page
M. Rice-Oxley and L. Turner-Stokes
Effectiveness of brain injury rehabilitation
Clinical Rehabilitation, January 1, 1999; 13(1_suppl): 7 - 24.
[Abstract] [PDF]