Article

OBJECTIVE: To provide evidence of construct validity for the FIM instrument in
the inpatient rehabilitation burn population. DESIGN: Confirmatory factor
analysis and item response theory were used to assess construct validity.
Confirmatory factor analysis was performed on a 2-factor model of the FIM
instrument and on a 6-subfactor model. Mokken scale analysis,
a nonparametric
item response theory, was performed on each of the FIM instrument's 2 major
factors, motor and cognitive domains. Internal consistency using Cronbach alpha
and Molenaar and Sijtsma's statistic was also examined. SETTING: Inpatient
rehabilitation facilities. PARTICIPANTS: Data from the Uniform Data System for
Medical Rehabilitation for patients with an impairment code of burn injury from
the years 2002 to 2011 were used for this analysis. A total of 7569 subjects were
included in the study. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:
Comparative fit index results for the confirmatory factor analyses and adherence
to assumptions of the Mokken scale model. RESULTS: Confirmatory factor analysis
provided a comparative fit index of .862 for the 2-factor model and .941 for the
6-subfactor model. Mokken scale analysis showed scalability coefficients of .681
and .891 for the motor and cognitive domains, respectively. Measures of internal
consistency statistic gave values of >.95 for each major domain of the FIM
instrument. CONCLUSIONS:
The FIM instrument has evidence of validity and
reliability as an outcome measure for patients with burn injuries in the
inpatient rehabilitation setting. The 6-subfactor model provides a better fit
than the 2-factor model by confirmatory factor analysis. There is evidence that
the motor and cognitive domains each form valid unidimensional metrics based on
nonparametric item response theory.
CI - Copyright (c) 2013 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by
Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Langue : ANGLAIS