Validity and Reliability Study of the Muscle Excitability Scale in Spinal Cord Injury Patients

Author(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 234-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
JF Ditunno ◽  
PL Ditunno ◽  
V Graziani ◽  
G Scivoletto ◽  
M Bernardi ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
pp. 026921552096670
Author(s):  
Huayi Xing ◽  
Nan Liu ◽  
Fin Biering-Sørensen

Objective: To investigate the validity and reliability of a Chinese version of Spinal Cord Independence Measure III (SCIM III) in individuals with spinal cord injury. Design: Study on psychometric properties. Setting: An inpatient rehabilitation facility in China. Subjects: 102 participants with spinal cord injury. Mean (SD) age was 48.8 (15.6) years; tetraplegia/paraplegia ratio was 50/52; median time post injury was 2 months. Intervention: SCIM III was translated into Chinese. Chinese versions of Barthel Index and SCIM III were filled out for each participant by Rater 1. SCIM III was then administered by Rater 2 after 24 hours ( n = 67) and 7 days ( n = 65). Main Measures: Validity, inter-rater/test-retest reliability, and internal consistency of the Chinese version of SCIM III. Results: The total scores between the two raters were similar (mean ± SD: 33.8 ± 25.8 vs 33.8 ± 25.5, P = 0.95). Total agreement between the raters in each item was >80%, with both Pearson and intraclass correlation coefficients >0.97 ( P < 0.01) for each subscale and total score. The Pearson correlation coefficients of the two independent assessments performed by Rater 2 were also >0.97 ( P < 0.01) for each subscale and the total score. Cronbach α was >0.7 for each subscale and the total score for both raters. High consistency was found between Barthel Index and SCIM III total scores (Pearson correlation coefficient = 0.88, P < 0.01). Conclusion: The Chinese version of SCIM III is valid and reliable for the functional assessment of patients with SCI.


2019 ◽  
Vol 125 ◽  
pp. e1016-e1022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marwa Summaka ◽  
Hiba Zein ◽  
Linda Abou Abbas ◽  
Charbel Elias ◽  
Elias Elias ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (Suppl1) ◽  
pp. 29-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maxwell Boakye ◽  
Barbara C. Leigh ◽  
Andrea C. Skelly

Object The aim of this study was to identify the quality of life (QOL) measures commonly used to assess patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) and to summarize studies using common QOL measures that have been validated in SCI populations to compare scores in persons with SCI with those in a control population. Methods A systematic search of PubMed was conducted to identify studies using common QOL measures in persons with SCI and those comparing scores for QOL measures in an SCI population with scores in other populations. The authors sought comparative studies utilizing QOL measures for which validity and reliability analyses had been done. Results Of 28 QOL measures found, validity and reliability studies had been conducted in patients with SCI for 5 measures. Twelve comparative studies compared QOL in SCI patients with QOL in healthy controls or in patients with other disabilities, or with normative data. The 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) and the short version of the WHOQOL (WHOQOL-BREF) were the most widely used QOL instruments. Patients with SCI had a decreased QOL as compared with that in healthy controls or normative data, with the most pronounced deficits in the domains of physical functioning and physical role limitations. In 3 studies, patients with tetraplegia had a lower physical domain QOL than did those with paraplegia. Overall, however, the impact of injury level and injury completeness on QOL after SCI remains unclear due to a lack of longitudinal studies. Conclusions The SF-36 and WHOQOL-BREF are validated instruments that should be considered for use in SCI QOL studies. Future analysis of deficits in QOL among patients with SCI would benefit from the development of a QOL instrument specifically targeted to SCI. Longitudinal studies to assess the impact of injury level and injury completeness on SCI QOL are also needed.


Spinal Cord ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 49 (6) ◽  
pp. 736-740 ◽  
Author(s):  
G Scivoletto ◽  
F Tamburella ◽  
L Laurenza ◽  
C Foti ◽  
J F Ditunno ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document