Reliability and validity of the German translation of the de Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI) performed by physiotherapists in patients admitted to a sub-acute inpatient geriatric rehabilitation hospital

BMC Geriatrics

Christian Grüneberg⁶  Christian Thiel⁶  Megan Davidson³  Natalie A de Morton⁵  Nico L van Meeteren²  Julia Reinke⁷  Ralf-Joachim Schulz⁴  Tobias Braun¹ 

[1] University of Cologne, Medical Faculty, Kerpener Str. 62, Cologne, 50937, Germany;CAPHRI, Maastricht University, Minderbroedersberg 4-6, Maastricht, 6211 LK, The Netherlands;School of Allied Health, College of Science, Health and Engineering, La Trobe University, Melbourne 3086, VIC, Australia;Department of Geriatric Medicine, St. Marien-Hospital, Kunibertskloster 11-13, Cologne, 50668, Germany;Donvale Rehabilitation Hospital, Ramsay Health, 1119 Doncaster Road, Donvale 3111, VIC, Australia;Department of Applied Health Sciences, Physiotherapy Program, Hochschule für Gesundheit, Universitätsstr. 105, Bochum, 44789, Germany;Catholic Clinic Bochum, Ruhr-University Bochum, Marien-Hospital Wattenscheid, Parkstr. 15, Bochum, 44866, Germany

关键词: Rehabilitation;    Psychometrics;    Geriatric assessment;    Mobility limitation;    Aged;   

Others  :  1206381
DOI  :  10.1186/s12877-015-0035-y

 received in 2014-12-15, accepted in 2015-03-24,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Mobility is a key outcome in geriatric rehabilitation. The de Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI) is an internationally well-established, unidimensional measure of mobility with good psychometric properties. The aim of this study was to examine the reliability and construct validity of the German translation of the DEMMI in geriatric inpatients.

Methods

This cross-sectional study included patients admitted to a sub-acute inpatient geriatric rehabilitation hospital (reliability sample: N = 33; validity sample: N = 107). Reliability, validity, and unidimensionality were investigated.

Results

Inter-rater reliability between two graduate physiotherapists was excellent, with intra-class correlation coefficient of 0.94 (95% confidence interval: 0.88-0.97). The minimal detectable change with 90% confidence was 9 points. Construct validity for the DEMMI was evidenced by significant moderate to strong correlations with other measures of mobility and related constructs (Performance Oriented Mobility Assessment: rho = 0.89; Functional Ambulation Categories: rho = 0.70; six-minute walk test: rho = 0.73; gait speed: rho = 0.67; Falls Efficacy Scale International: rho = −0.68). Known-groups validity was indicated by significant DEMMI mean group differences between independent versus dependent walkers and walking aid users versus non-users. Unidimensionality of the German DEMMI translation was confirmed by Rasch analysis.

Conclusions

The German translation of the DEMMI is a unidimensional instrument producing valid and reproducible measurement of mobility in an inpatient geriatric rehabilitation setting.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Braun et al.; licensee BioMed Central.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Brown CJ, Redden DT, Flood KL, Allman RM: The underrecognized epidemic of low mobility during hospitalization of older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc 2009, 57:1660-5.
• [2]Levasseur M, Desrosiers J, Noreau L: Is social participation associated with quality of life of older adults with physical disabilities? Disabil Rehabil 2004, 26:1206-13.
• [3]Jette AM, Keysor J, Coster W, Ni P, Haley S: Beyond function: predicting participation in a rehabilitation cohort. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005, 86:2087-94.
• [4]Brown CJ, Flood KL: Mobility limitation in the older patient: a clinical review. JAMA 2013, 310:1168-77.
• [5]World Health Organization: International classification of functioning, disability and health: ICF. World Health Organization, Geneva; 2001.
• [6]Hubbard RE, Eeles EMP, Rockwood MRH, Fallah N, Ross E, Mitnitski A, et al.: Assessing balance and mobility to track illness and recovery in older inpatients. J Gen Intern Med 2011, 26:1471-8.
• [7]European Commission: The fourth demographic forum. European Commission, Brussels; 2013.
• [8]Etman A, Burdorf A, van der Cammen TJM, Mackenbach JP, van Lenthe FJ: Socio-demographic determinants of worsening in frailty among community-dwelling older people in 11 European countries. J Epidemiol Community Health 2012, 66:1116-21.
• [9]Stuck AE, Siu AL, Wieland GD, Adams J, Rubenstein LZ: Comprehensive geriatric assessment: a meta-analysis of controlled trials. Lancet 1993, 342:1032-6.
• [10]Tinetti ME: Performance-oriented assessment of mobility problems in elderly patients. J Am Geriatr Soc 1986, 34:119-26.
• [11]Holden MK, Gill KM, Magliozzi MR: Gait assessment for neurologically impaired patients: standards for outcome assessment. Phys Ther 1986, 66:1530-9.
• [12]Enright PL, McBurnie MA, Bittner V, Tracy RP, McNamara R, Arnold A, et al.: The 6-min walk test: a quick measure of functional status in elderly adults. Chest 2003, 123:387-98.
• [13]Hobart JC, Cano SJ, Zajicek JP, Thompson AJ: Rating scales as outcome measures for clinical trials in neurology: problems, solutions, and recommendations. Lancet Neurol 2007, 6:1094-105.
• [14]Grimby G, Tennant A, Tesio L: The use of raw scores from ordinal scales: time to end malpractice? J Rehabil Med 2012, 44:97-8.
• [15]Cipriany-Dacko LM, Innerst D, Johannsen J, Rude V: Interrater reliability of the Tinetti Balance Scores in novice and experienced physical therapy clinicians. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1997, 78:1160-4.
• [16]Jamour M, Becker C, Bachmann S, Gruneberg C, Heckmann J, Marburger C, et al.: Recommendation of an assessment protocol to describe geriatric inpatient rehabilitation of lower limb mobility based on ICF: an interdisciplinary consensus process. Z Gerontol Geriatr 2011, 44:429-36.
• [17]Morton NA, Berlowitz DJ, Keating JL: A systematic review of mobility instruments and their measurement properties for older acute medical patients. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2008, 6:44.
• [18]Benzinger P, Lindemann U, Becker C, Aminian K, Jamour M, Flick SE: Geriatric rehabilitation after hip fracture: role of body-fixed sensor measurements of physical activity. Z Gerontol Geriatr 2014, 47:236-42.
• [19]Davenport SJ, Paynter S, de Morton NA: What instruments have been used to assess the mobility of community-dwelling older adults? Phys Ther Rev 2008, 13:345-54.
• [20]de Morton NA, Davidson M, Keating JL: The de Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI): an essential health index for an ageing world. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2008, 6:63.
• [21]de Morton NA, Davidson M, Keating JL: The Development of the de Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI) in an independent sample of older acute medical patients: refinement and validation using the Rasch model (part 2). J Appl Meas 2013, 14:219-31.
• [22]de Morton NA, Davidson M, Keating JL: The development of the de morton mobility index (DEMMI) in an older acute medical population: item reduction using the Rasch model (part 1). J Appl Meas 2013, 14:159-78.
• [23]Rasch G: Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. University of Chicago Press, Chicago; 1980.
• [24]de Morton N, Davidson M, Keating JL: Reliability of the de Morton mobility index (DEMMI) in an older acute medical population. Physiother Res Int 2010, 16:159-69.
• [25]de Morton NA, Lane K: Validity and reliability of the de Morton Mobility Index in the subacute hospital setting in a geriatric evaluation and management population. J Rehabil Med 2010, 42:956-61.
• [26]Johnston M, de Morton N, Harding K, Taylor N: Measuring mobility in patients living in the community with Parkinson disease. NeuroRehabilitation 2013, 32:957-66.
• [27]Jans M, Slootweg VC, Boot CR, de Morton NA, van der Sluis G, van Meeteren NL: Reproducibility and validity of the Dutch translation of the de Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI) used by physiotherapists in older patients with knee or hip osteoarthritis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2011, 92:1892-9.
• [28]Braun T, Schulz R, Hoffmann M, Reinke J, Tofaute L, Urner C, et al.: German version of the de Morton mobility index: first clinical results from the process of the cross-cultural adaptation. Z Gerontol Geriatr 2015, 48:154-63.
• [29]Beaton D, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz M: Recommendations for the cross-cultural adaptation of health status measures. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons & Institute, Illinois, USA & Toronto, Canada; 1998.
• [30]Bonett DG: Sample size requirements for estimating intraclass correlations with desired precision. Stat Med 2002, 21:1331-5.
• [31]Tinetti ME, Williams TF, Mayewski R: Fall risk index for elderly patients based on number of chronic disabilities. Am J Med 1986, 80:429-34.
• [32]Kegelmeyer DA, Kloos AD, Thomas KM, Kostyk SK: Reliability and validity of the Tinetti Mobility Test for individuals with Parkinson disease. Phys Ther 2007, 87:1369-78.
• [33]Collen FM, Wade DT, Bradshaw CM: Mobility after stroke: reliability of measures of impairment and disability. Int Disabil Stud 1990, 12:6-9.
• [34]Mehrholz J, Wagner K, Rutte K, Meissner D, Pohl M: Predictive validity and responsiveness of the functional ambulation category in hemiparetic patients after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007, 88:1314-9.
• [35]Harada ND, Chiu V, Stewart AL: Mobility-related function in older adults: assessment with a 6-minute walk test. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999, 80:837-41.
• [36]Bean JF, Kiely DK, Leveille SG, Herman S, Huynh C, Fielding R, et al.: The 6-minute walk test in mobility-limited elders: what is being measured? J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2002, 57:M751-6.
• [37]Fritz S, Lusardi M: White paper: “walking speed: the sixth vital sign”. J Geriatr Phys Ther 2009, 32:46-9.
• [38]Lindemann U, Najafi B, Zijlstra W, Hauer K, Muche R, Becker C, et al.: Distance to achieve steady state walking speed in frail elderly persons. Gait Posture 2008, 27:91-6.
• [39]Farag I, Sherrington C, Kamper SJ, Ferreira M, Moseley AM, Lord SR, et al.: Measures of physical functioning after hip fracture: construct validity and responsiveness of performance-based and self-reported measures. Age Ageing 2012, 41:659-64.
• [40]Yardley L, Beyer N, Hauer K, Kempen G, Piot-Ziegler C, Todd C: Development and initial validation of the Falls Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I). Age Ageing 2005, 34:614-9.
• [41]Zijlstra GAR, van Haastregt JCM, van Rossum E, van Eijk JTM, Yardley L, Kempen GIJM: Interventions to reduce fear of falling in community-living older people: a systematic review. J Am Geriatr Soc 2007, 55:603-15.
• [42]Ambrose AF, Paul G, Hausdorff JM: Risk factors for falls among older adults: a review of the literature. Maturitas 2013, 75:51-61.
• [43]Anders J, Dapp U, Laub S, von Renteln-Kruse W: Impact of fall risk and fear of falling on mobility of independently living senior citizens transitioning to frailty: screening results concerning fall prevention in the community. Z Gerontol Geriatr 2007, 40:255-67.
• [44]Dias N, Kempen GIJM, Todd CJ, Beyer N, Freiberger E, Piot-Ziegler C, et al.: The German version of the Falls Efficacy Scale-International Version (FES-I). Z Gerontol Geriatr 2006, 39:297-300.
• [45]Hauer KA, Kempen GIJM, Schwenk M, Yardley L, Beyer N, Todd C, et al.: Validity and sensitivity to change of the falls efficacy scales international to assess fear of falling in older adults with and without cognitive impairment. Gerontology 2011, 57:462-72.
• [46]McGraw KO, Wong SP: Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychol Methods 1996, 1:30-46.
• [47]de Vet HCW, Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL: Measurement in medicine: a practical guide. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York; 2011.
• [48]Stratford PW, Binkley JM, Riddle DL: Health status measures: strategies and analytic methods for assessing change scores. Phys Ther 1996, 76:1109-23.
• [49]Bland JM, Altman DG: Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986, 1:307-10.
• [50]Terwee CB, Bot SDM, de Boer MR, Van der Windt DAWM, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al.: Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 2007, 60:34-42.
• [51]Altman DG, Machin D, Bryant TN, Gardner MJ: Statistics with confidence: confidence intervals and statistical guidelines. 2nd edition. BMJ Books, Great Britain; 2000.
• [52]Abdi H: Bonferroni and Sidak corrections for multiple comparisons. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA; 2007.
• [53]de Morton NA, Harding KE, Taylor NF, Harrison G: Validity of the de Morton Mobility Index (DEMMI) for measuring the mobility of patients with hip fracture during rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil 2013, 35:105-11.
• [54]Tennant A, Pallant JF: Unidimensionality Matters! (A Tale of Two Smiths?). Rasch Meas Trans 2006, 20:1048-51.
• [55]Linacre JM: Sample size and item calibration stability. Rasch Meas Trans 1994, 7:328.
• [56]McGough EL, Kelly VE, Logsdon RG, McCurry SM, Cochrane BB, Engel JM, et al.: Associations between physical performance and executive function in older adults with mild cognitive impairment: gait speed and the timed “up & go” test. Phys Ther 2011, 91:1198-207.
• [57]Buchman AS, Boyle PA, Leurgans SE, Barnes LL, Bennett DA: Cognitive function is associated with the development of mobility impairments in community-dwelling elders. Am J Geriatric Psychiatry 2011, 19:571-80.
• [58]Joray S, Wietlisbach V, Bula CJ: Cognitive impairment in elderly medical inpatients: detection and associated six-month outcomes. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 2004, 12:639-47.
• [59]Davenport SJ, de Morton NA: Clinimetric properties of the de Morton Mobility Index in healthy, community-dwelling older adults. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2011, 92:51-8.