functional independence measure assessment manual

File Name:functional independence measure assessment manual.pdf
Size:2828 KB
Type:PDF, ePub, eBook, fb2, mobi, txt, doc, rtf, djvu
Category:Book
Uploaded27 May 2019, 15:17 PM
InterfaceEnglish
Rating4.6/5 from 642 votes
StatusAVAILABLE
Last checked5 Minutes ago!

functional independence measure assessment manual

FIM items remain unchanged. A goal score can be set at the same time as recording the admission score based on planned therapeutic intervention. For further information on upcoming course information please contact Elica Ming-Brown. Functional Assessment Measure (PDF, 374kb), Clin Rehabil. 1999 Aug;13(4):277-87. That is usually the journal article where the information was first stated. In most cases Physiopedia articles are a secondary source and so should not be used as references. Physiopedia articles are best used to find the original sources of information (see the references list at the bottom of the article). If you believe that this Physiopedia article is the primary source for the information you are refering to, you can use the button below to access a related citation statement. Cite article Irrespective of the use of any assistive device, the person is considered complete independence. The structure and stability of the functional independence measure. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1994. 75: 127-132. Physiopedia is not a substitute for professional advice or expert medical services from a qualified healthcare provider. Read more. From high-quality clinical care and groundbreaking research to community programs that improve quality of life, philanthropic support drives our mission and vision. In 2020, your cash gifts may also favorably impact your taxes, thanks to provisions in the CARES Act. Apply now for a pilot project. Updated by Maggie Bland, PT, DPT, NCS and Nancy Byl PT, MPH, PhD, FAPTA and the PD EDGE task force of the neurology section of the APTA in April of 2016. These recommendations were developed by a panel of research and clinical experts using a modified Delphi process.

Although the FIM instrument was originally developed to address issues of sensitivity and comprehensiveness for Barthel Index (BI), subsequent studies demonstrated that psychometric properties of the FIM instrument and BI are similar (Hsueh et al, 2002; Stroke EDGE task force) Thus, data from 340 patients involved in post stroke rehabilitation were fitted to a Rasch model. The FIM Motor Scale satisfied Rasch model expectations including the uni-dimensionality assumption without requiring deletion of any of the 13 items. This analysis reinforces that the FIM Motor Scale contains clinically important items. (Lungren Nilsson et al 2011). The scoring on the FIM was recoded to a 3-point scale to indicate degrees of independence and the final model (from both assessments) contained 36-items, the bowel management item was removed as it was highly correlated (0.81) with the bladder management item (Chen, 2013). Barthel Index can be measured directly or estimated from the Northwick Park Dependency Scale (NPDS) or the FIM. Following hospital discharge of 717 patients (TBI and stroke), there was excellent agreement of intra-class correlations between the total scores on the FIM and the NPDS (0.93; P Although the FIM instrument was originally developed to address issues of sensitivity and comprehensiveness for Barthel Index (BI), subsequent studies demonstrated that psychometric properties of the FIM instrument and BI are similar (Hsueh et al, 2002; Stroke EDGE task force) FIM scores were tracked at admission, discharge, three and 12 months after discharge. At three months, black and Hispanic patients had lower FIM totals when compared to whites. In addition, total FIM ratings increased for all three group form discharge to three months post, but then showed little change after.With scores ranging from 13-91, the MCID was 11. As a measure of global physical activities, the FIM Motor Scale may be impacted by many other factors beyond specific arm function.

The CAHAI or the ARAT may be a more appropriate arm outcome measure for stroke survivors with severe impairments. (Sivan et al, 2011) Please e-mail us ! In addition, the change in LOS at the IRF and community discharge was compared over time with the implementation of a prospective payment system (PPS) for individuals on Medicare. The study examined initial characteristics of veterans predictive of grade IV achievement on the FIM. A point system was assigned to each of the above variables, such that the clinician could enter in the above information and determine the likelihood of a patient achieving a grade IV.A similar predictive equation was derived with the sum score quartiles slightly modified. Assessments were administered prior and after therapy, and a Chi-squared Automatic Interaction Detector method was used to identify the strongest predictors of change on the Stroke Impact Scale.Assessments were done at baseline and post-intervention. A linear regression was run to determine which factors contributed to Motor-FIM (M-FIM) gain and Cognitive-FIM (C-FIM) gain. All correlations significant at p This scale included four components of the ICF:1). The activities were rated as limitations or restriction in domains as: none, slight, moderate, severe or complete. This new scale was correlated with FIM scores. Find it on PubMed Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed J Rehabil Med 43 (10): p.

884-91. Find it on PubMed. Scand J Occup Ther. 1-7. Find it on PubMed. A study of the psychometric properties. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 49 (3): p. 341-51. Find it on PubMed Disabil Rehabil. 38 (3): p. 289-98. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed Phys Ther 93 (12): p. 1592-602 Find it on PubMed PLoS One 10 (6): p. e0130925. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed J Rehabil Med 42 (7): p. 609-13. Find it in PubMed Int J Rehabil Res 37 (4): p. 343-8. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed Brain Inj 29 (6): p. 772-6. Find it on PubMed J Rehabil Med 43 (3): p. 181-9. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed Clin Rehabil 24 (12): p. 1121-6. Find it on PubMed. A systematic review of the validity of cognitive screening instruments within one month after stroke. Clin Rehabil 29 (7): p. 694-704 Find it on PubMed Singapore Med J. 54 (10): p. 564-8. Find it on PubMed. Find it on PubMed If this is an emergency, please dial 911. Discharge assessment is collected within 72 hours prior to the end of a rehabilitation episode.Reference documents: Uniform Data System for Medical Rehabilitation 2009.Viewed 19 September 2012, Relational attributes. For over 15 years, the FIM was an acronym for “Functional Independence Measure.” It is still often cited as this in the literature.Individual FIM item scores range from 1 (“total assist”; performs less than 25% of task) to 7 (“complete independence”). Scores falling below 6 require another person for supervision or assistance. Google Scholar Hall, K. M., Bushnik, T., Lakisic-Kazazic, B. et al. (2001). Assessing traumatic brain injury outcome measures for long-term follow-up of community-based individuals. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 72, 790 (abstract). Google Scholar In: Kreutzer J.S., DeLuca J., Caplan B. (eds) Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology. Springer, New York, NY.

Description of Measure: The severity of care-recipient functioning and impairments may be determined with the Functional Independence Measure (FIMSM; Uniform Data Set for Medical Rehabilitation, 1996). The FIMSM contains 13 items that assess motor functioning (eating, grooming, bathing, dressing, toileting, bowel and bladder control, transfers, and locomotion) and 5 items that measure cognitive functioning (communication and social cognition). Each item is rated on an ordinal scale ranging from 1 (Total Assistance) to 7 (Complete Independence). Lower scores indicate more functional deficits. A version of the FIM is available for use in telephone interviews. Ideally, raters receive expert training for proper use of the FIM. It is widely used in most accredited medical rehabilitation programs and associated outcome research. (e.g., Caro et al., 2016). Disability and Rehabilitation, 16 (2), 63-71. Buffalo, NY: Research Foundation of the State University of New York. Guide for the use of the uniform data set for medical rehabilitation, Version 5.0. Buffalo, NY: State University of New York at Buffalo Research Foundation. How could we improve this content. Unfortunately we couldn't find the page you requested. If you used a bookmark, or you are absolutely sure that you typed in the address correctly, then our page has either been moved or removed. If assistive equipment (ex.It has limitations in sensitivity to component abilities within tasks for people with SCI. There is a ceiling effect with the socio-cognitive subscale for individuals with and it does not measure the social, psychological, or vocational impact of disability experienced by those living with SCI. Disabil Rehabil. 2016;38(22):2229-34. United States (US) multi-center study to assess the validity and reliability of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM III). Spinal Cord, 2011; 49: 880-885. Spinal Cord. 2014;52(4):276-81.

Relationship between motor FIM and muscle strength in lower cervical-level spinal cord injuries. Spinal Cord, 2004; 42: 533-540. Validation of the Italian version of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM III) Self-Report. Spinal Cord. 2016;54(7):553-60. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1990;71:326-329. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999;80(11):1477-84. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 1999; 80:867-76. Validity of the walking scale for spinal cord injury and other domains of function in a multicenter clinical trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 2007; 21: 539-550. A validation of the functional independence measurement and its performance among rehabilitation inpatients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 1993; 74: 531-536. Client-centred assessment and the identification of meaningful treatment goals for individuals with a spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord, 2004; 42:302-307. Spinal Cord. 1999;37(1):58-61. The Uniform Data System for Medical Rehabilitation: report of follow-up information on patients discharged from inpatient rehabilitation programs in 2002-2010. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2014;93(3):231-44. Advances in functional assessment for medical rehabilitation. Top Geriatr Rehabil 1986;1:59-74. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil 2005;10:65-74. Construct validity and dimensional structure of the ASIA motor scale. J Spinal Cord Med 2006;29:39-45. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999;80:1471-1476. Interrater reliability of the 7-level functional independence measure (FIM). Scand J Rehab Med 1994;26:115-119. Relation of disability costs to function: spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999;80:385-391. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1997;78:143-149. Association of various comorbidity measures with spinal cord injury rehabilitation outcomes. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;94(4 Suppl):S75-86. Disability and Rehabilitation, 2007; 29(24): 1926-1933. Outcome measures for gait and ambulation in the spinal cord injury population. J Spinal Cord Med. 2008;31(5):487-99. Spinal Cord. 1997;35(1):22-5. Acta Medica Mediterr. 2014; 30: 291-295.

Using individual growth curve models to predict recovery and activities of daily living after spinal cord injury: an SCIRehab project study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;94(4 Suppl):S154-64.e1-4. Clin Rehabil, 2001; 15:311-319. Spinal Cord 2006; 44: 746-752. Cross-diagnostic validity in a generic instrument: an example from the Functional Independence Measure in Scandinavia. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 2006; 4:55-62 Metric properties of the ASIA motor score: subscales improve correlation with functional activities. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004;85:1804-1810. The Capabilities of Upper Extremity Instrument: Reliability and Validity of a Measure of Functional Limitation in Tetraplegia. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1998;79:1512-21. Content validity of a pediatric Functional Independence Measure. Appl Nurs Res 1990;3:120-122. Oxford University Press, New York NY, 1996. Spinal Cord 2006; 44: 495-504. Self-Efficacy and Spinal Cord Injury: Psychometric Properties of a New Scale. Rehabil Psychol 2003; 48(4):281-8 Spinal Cord 2005;43:27-33. Psychometric rigor of the Grasp and Release Test for measuring functional limitation of persons with tetraplegia: a preliminary analysis. J Spinal Cord Med 2004; 27:41-6. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, 2005; 111(4):264-273. Responsiveness and concurrent validity of the revised capabilities of upper extremity-questionnaire (CUE-Q) in patients with acute tetraplegia. Spinal Cord. 2014;52(8):625-8. The reliability of the functional independence measure: a quantitative review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1996;77:1226-1232. Quality of residual neuromuscular control and functional deficits in patients with spinal cord injury. Front Neurol. 2013;4:174. Spinal Cord. 2013;51(3):214-7. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1997;78(6):644-50. Interinstitutional agreement of individual functional independence measure (FIM) items measured at two sites on one sample of SCI patients. Paraplegia, 1993; 31: 622-631. Psychometric evaluation of the Spanish version of the MPI-SCI.

Spinal Cord. 2013;51(7):538-52. Measuring change in arm hand skilled performance in persons with a cervical spinal cord injury: responsiveness of the Van Lieshout Test. Spinal Cord 2006; 44: 772-779. The Functional Independence Measure: tests of scaling assumptions, structure, and reliability across 20 diverse impairment categories. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1996;77(11):1101-8. Spinal Cord 1998;36:832-837. Friedman Building University of British Columbia. Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z3. Tel: 604.714.4105. Each of the 18 items are graded on a scale of 1-7, based on the level of independence in that item. This scale is used to assess how well a person can carry out basic activities of daily living and how dependent they will be on help from others. Clients within the Modified Dependence Levels are eligible for the Ethos GPS Remote Assessment Servic e. Please click here to contact your local Business Development Manager today to book yours. Registered in England Company No. 12403172 If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it. Ok.