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 Houlden, H. Articles by Greenwood, R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Houlden, H. Articles by Greenwood, R. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Use of the Barthel Index and the Functional Independence Measure during early inpatient rehabilitation after single incident brain injury

Mark Edwards

Jane McNeil

Richard Greenwood

Regional Neurological Rehabilitation Unit, Homerton Hospital, London, UK

Objective: To compare the appropriateness and responsiveness of the Barthel Index and the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) during early inpatient rehabilitation after single incident brain injury.

Design: Cohort study.

Setting: A regional neurological rehabilitation unit.

Patients: Two hundred and fifty-nine consecutive patients undergoing inpatient comprehensive neurological rehabilitation following a vascular brain injury due to single cerebral infarction (n=75), spontaneous intracerebral haemorrhage (n=34) and subarachnoid haemorrhage (n=43), and 107 patients who had sustained traumatic brain injury.

Measurements: Admission and discharge FIM total, physical and cognitive scores and the Barthel Index were recorded. Appropriateness and responsiveness in the study samples were determined by examining score distributions and floor and ceiling effects, and by an effect size calculation respectively. Non-parametric statistical analysis was used to calculate the significance of the change in scores.

Results: In all patient groups there was a significant improvement (Wilcoxon's rank sum, P < 0.0001) in the Barthel Index (mean change score: vascular 3.9, traumatic 3.95) and FIM (mean change score: vascular 17.3, traumatic 17.4) scores during rehabilitation, and similar effect sizes were found for the Barthel Index (effect size: vascular 0.65, traumatic 0.55) and FIM total (effect size: vascular 0.59, traumatic 0.48) and physical scores in all patient groups. In each patient group the cognitive component of the FIM had the smallest effect size (0.35-0.43).

Conclusions: All measures were appropriate for younger (less than 65 years of age) patients undergoing early inpatient rehabilitation after single incident vascular or traumatic brain injury. The Barthel Index and the total and physical FIM scores showed similar responsiveness, whilst the cognitive FIM score was least responsive. These findings suggest that none of the FIM scores have any advantage over the Barthel Index in evaluating change in these circumstances.

Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 20, No. 2, 153-159 (2006)
DOI: 10.1191/0269215506cr917oa


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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. Wade Adverse effects of rehabilitation - an opportunity to increase quality and effectiveness of rehabilitation Clinical Rehabilitation, May 1, 2009; 23(5): 387 - 393. [PDF]

				S. Mangold, C. Schuster, T. Keller, A. Zimmermann-Schlatter, and T. Ettlin Motor Training of Upper Extremity With Functional Electrical Stimulation in Early Stroke Rehabilitation Neurorehabil Neural Repair, February 1, 2009; 23(2): 184 - 190. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. J. Cano, R. J. O'Connor, A. J. Thompson, and J. C. Hobart Exploring disability rating scale responsiveness II: Do more response options help? Neurology, December 12, 2006; 67(11): 2056 - 2059. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]