The Functional Independence Measure 18-item version can be reported as a unidimensional interval-scaled metric: Internal construct validity revisited
Roxanne Maritz, Alan Tennant, Carolina Fellinghauer, Gerold Stucki, Birgit Prodinger
Rehabilitation Services & Care Unit, Swiss Paraplegic Research, 6207 Nottwil, Switzerland. E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Objective: Since the 1990s the Functional Independence Measure (FIM™) was believed to measure 2 different constructs, represented by its motor and cognitive subscales. The practice of reporting FIM™ total scores, together with recent developments in the understanding of the influence of locally dependent items on fit to the Rasch model, raises the question of whether the FIM™ 18-item version can be reported as a unidimensional interval-scaled metric.
Design: Rasch analysis of the FIM™ using testlet approaches to accommodate local response dependency.
Patients: A calibration sample containing 946 cases of data from 11,103 patients undergoing neurological or musculoskeletal rehabilitation in Switzerland in 2016.
Results: Baseline analysis and the traditional testlet approach showed no fit with the Rasch model. When items were grouped into 2 testlets, fit to the Rasch model was achieved, indicating unidimensionality across all 18 items. A transformation table to convert FIM™ raw ordinal scores to the corresponding Rasch interval scaled values was created.
Conclusion: This study provides evidence that FIM™ total scores represent a unidimensional set of items, supporting their use in clinical practice and outcome reporting when applying the respective transformation table. This provides a basis for standardized reporting of functioning.
The aim of this study was to look in detail at the FIM™, an assessment tool often used for patients undergoing rehabilitation. Some users report the FIM™ as 2 scores: one related to motor tasks, the other to cognitive tasks; others recommend reporting it as a single score including both motor and cognitive tasks. This study explored whether it is statistically meaningful to sum all the points into a single FIM™ total score. The results support the current practice of summing the points into a single total score for patients undergoing musculo-skeletal and neurological rehabilitation. The results also allowed an interval scale to be derived from the FIM™, enabling a broad range of calculations to be made using the FIM™ score, such as calculating the change in FIM™ outcomes from the time a patient is admitted to a rehabilitation clinic until their discharge.
Do you want to comment on this paper? The comments will show up here and if appropriate the comments will also separately be forwarded to the authors.
You need to login/create an account to comment on articles. Click here to login/create an account