Measurement properties of the LIFE-H 3.1 BRASIL for the assessment of social participation after stroke
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.34024/rnc.2015.v23.7985Keywords:
Stroke, Questionnaires, Social Participation, Reproducibility of ResultsAbstract
Objective. To evaluate the measurement properties of the LIFE-H 3.1-Brasil, a generic tool for the assessment of social participation, with stroke subjects. Method. The measurement properties were evaluated using Rasch analysis with 109 subjects (58±12 years). Results. In the analysis of the adequacy of the scoring scale, the scoring criteria were not always fully utilized, suggesting that they could be simplified. The principal component analysis of the residuals suggested the presence of at least a second dimension in both sub-scales, which is congruent with the construct of social participation. Although the limit of 5% of erratic items was exceeded for both sub-scales, the elimination of these items is not recommended, since they could be useful with other health conditions, considering that the LIFE-H is a generic instrument. For both the sub-scales ‘Daily activities’ and ‘Social roles’, high levels of reliability and adequate fit with the skill levels of the sample were observed. Conclusion. The LIFE-H 3.1-Brasil measures a multidimensional construct, which requires caution in interpreting its total scores. However, satisfactory measurement properties were found, demonstrating its clinical utility to be applied with stroke subjects with various levels of social participation
Metrics
References
Organização Mundial de Saúde. Organização Panamericana de Saúde. CIFClassificação Internacional de Funcionalidade, Incapacidade e Saúde. São Paulo: Edusp, 2003, 325 p.
Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Secretaria de Atenção à Saúde. Departamento de Ações Programáticas Estratégicas. Diretrizes de atenção à reabilitação da pessoa com acidente vascular cerebral. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde, 2013, 72p.
Mayo NE, Wood-Dauphinee S, Côté R, Durcan L, Carlton J. Activity, participation and quality of life 6 months after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002;83:1035-42.http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/apmr.2002.33984
Scalzo PL, Souza ES, Moreira AGO, Vieira DAF. Quality of life in patients with stroke: physical therapy clinic Puc Minas Betim. Rev Neurocienc 2010;18:139-44.
Noreau L, Fougeyrollas P, Vincent C. The LIFE-H: Assessment of the quality of social participation. Technol Disabil 2002;14:113-8.
Figueiredo S, Korner-Bitensky N, Rochette A, Desrosiers J. Use of the LIFE-H in stroke rehabilitation: A structured review of its psychometric properties. Disabil Rehabil 2010; 32:705-12. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/09638280903295458
Tyson S, Connell L. The psychometric properties and clinical utility of measures of walking and mobility in neurological conditions: A systematic review. Clin Rehabil 2009; 23:1018-33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0269215509339004
Assumpção FSN. Adaptação transcultural e propriedades de medida do LIFE- H 3.1-Brasil para avaliação da participação social em hemiparéticos (Dissertação). Belo Horizonte: Escola de Educação Física, Fisioterapia e Terapia Ocupacional, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais; 2014, 97p.
Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 2000;25:3186- 91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
Gregson JM, Leathley M, Moore AP, Sharma AK, Smith TL, Watkins CL. Reliability of the Tone Assessment Scale and the Modified Ashworth Scale as clinical tools for assessing poststroke spasticity. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999;80:1013-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0003-9993(99)90053-9
Faria-Fortini I, Michaelsen SM, Cassiano JG, Teixeira-Salmela LF. Upper extremity function in stroke subjects: Relationships between the InternationalClassification of Functioning, Disability and Health domains. J Hand Ther 2011;24:257-64.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jht.2011.01.002
Riddle DL, Finucane SD, Rothstein JM, Walker ML. Intrasession and intersession reliability of hand-held dynamometer measurements taken on brain- -damaged patients. Phys Ther 1989;69:182-94.
Bertolucci PHF, Brucki SMD, Campacci SR, Juliano Y. O mini-exame do estado mental em uma população geral: impacto da escolaridade. Arq Neuropsiquiatr 1994;52:1-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0004-282X1994000100001
Chen WH, Lenderking W, Jin Y, Wyrwich KW, Gelhorn H, Revicki DA. Is Rasch model analysis applicable in small sample size pilot studies for assessing item characteristics? An example using PROMIS pain behavior item bank data. Qual Life Res 2014;23:485-93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0487-5
Teles MS, Gusmão C. Functional evaluation of patients with stroke using the protocol of Fugl-Meyer. Rev Neurocienc 2012;20:42-9.
Fugl-Meyer AR. Post-stroke hemiplegia assessment of physical properties. Scan J Rehabil Med Suppl 1980;7:85-93.
Bowden MG, Balasubramanian CK, Behrman AL, Kautz SA. Validation of a speed-based classification system using quantitative measures of walking performance post-stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2008;22:672-5.http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1545968308318837
Bond TG, Fox CM. Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge; 2010, 352p.
Chern JS, Kielhofner G, Heras CG, Magalhães LC. The volitional questionnaire: Psychometric development and practical use. Am J Occup Ther 1996;50:516-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.5014/ajot.50.7.516
Tennant A, Conaghan PG. The Rasch measurement model in rheumatology: What is it and why use it? When should it be applied, and what should onelook for in a Rasch paper? Arthritis Rheum 2007;57:1358-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/art.23108
Tennant A, Penta M, Tesio L, Grimby G, Thonnard JL, Slade A, et al. Assessing and adjusting for cross-cultural validity of impairment and activity limitation scales through differential item functioning within the framework of the Rasch model: The PRO-ESOR project. Med Care 2004;42(1 Suppl):S37-48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000103529.63132.77
Linacre JM. A user’s guide to Winsteps® Ministep Rasch-model computer programs. Program manual 3.80.0 (Endereço na Internet). Chicago: WINSTEPS. com (atializado em 2013; acessado em 12/2014). Disponível em: http://www.winsteps.com/a/winsteps-manual.pdf.
Bambirra C, Magalhães LC, Rodrigues-de-Paula F. Reliability and validity of the BESTest and MiniBESTest in chronic hemiparesis. Rev Neurocienc 2015;23:30-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.4181/RNC.2015.23.01.943.11p
Kornetti DL, Fritz SL, Chiu YP, Light KE, Velozo CA. Rating scale analysis of the Berg Balance Scale. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004;85:1128-35. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.apmr.2003.11.019
Saunders DH, Sanderson M, Brazzelli M, Greig CA, Mead GE. Physical fitness training for patients with stroke: An updated review. Stroke 2014;45:e54-5. http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.003935
Dumont C, Bertrand R, Fougeyrollas P, Gervais M. Rasch modeling and the measurement of social participation. J Appl Meas 2003;4:309-25.
Desrosiers J, Noreau L, Rochette A. Social participation of older adults in Quebec. Aging Clin Exp Res 2004;16:406-12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF03324572
Poulin V, Desrosiers J. Participation after stroke: comparing proxies’ and patients’ perceptions. J Rehabil Med 2008;40:28-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.2340/16501977-0115
