This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Panesar, B S Articles by Hunter, J Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Panesar, B S Articles by Hunter, J Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

A comparison of three measures of progress in early lower limb amputee rehabilitation

P Morrison

J Hunter

Astley Ainslie Hospital, Edinburgh, Scotland

Objective: To assess the responsiveness to change and validity of three established outcome measures in relation to early lower limb vascular amputee rehabilitation: the Functional Independence Measure (FIM), the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys Scale (OPCS) and the Amputee Activity Score (AAS).

Design: Prospective observational study. Setting: Inpatient amputee rehabilitation unit. Subjects: Fifty-one consecutive patients admitted for rehabilitation following lower limb amputation for vascular disease.

Procedure: To study the responsiveness to change differences between total scores and between subsection scores at different times were analysed. To assess validity, comparisons of the total scores of the measures were made with each other, and the total scores for each measure were compared with other outcomes.

Results: Complete scores were obtained on 34 subjects. All measures showed significant change between admission and discharge (p < 0.00001) but only the AAS showed change between discharge and follow-up (p < 0.0001). Subsection analysis revealed expected improvements in mobility. During the inpatient stage progress was also detected in certain activities of daily living in the FIM and OPCS. The measures correlated with each other (p < 0.001). All of the measures’ admission scores correlated with duration of stay (OPCS p < 0.005, AAS p < 0.006, FIM p < 0.009) and admission OPCS also correlated with discharge placement (p < 0.036).

Conclusion: The FIM and OPCS are suitable for the inpatient stage but the AAS would appear to be the best measure at time of discharge and thereafter, and further studies are justified.

Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 15, No. 2, 157-171 (2001)
DOI: 10.1191/026921501669259476


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				N. Warren and L. Manderson Constructing Hope: Dis/continuity and the Narrative Construction of Recovery in the Rehabilitation Unit Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, April 1, 2008; 37(2): 180 - 201. [Abstract] [PDF]