Ca. Velozo et al., FUNCTIONAL SCALE DISCRIMINATION AT ADMISSION AND DISCHARGE - RASCH ANALYSIS OF THE LEVEL OF REHABILITATION SCALE-III, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 76(8), 1995, pp. 705-712
Objective: To determine the construct validity of the Level of Rehabil
itation Scale-III (LORS-III) with a special focus on this instrument's
capability to discriminate rehabilitation inpatient activities of dai
ly living (ADL)/mobility and communication/cognition ability at admiss
ion and discharge. Design: Rasch analysis of existing data sets in the
LORS-III American Data System (LADS). Patients: Existing admission an
d discharge data from 3056 rehabilitation inpatients (musculoskeletal
injury, cerebrovascular accident, multiple injuries/diseases, brain in
jury, neuromuscular disorder, and spinal cord injury) entered into LAD
S between April 1992 and January 1993. Main Outcome Measure: LORS-III
consists of 17 measurement areas representing abilities in ADL, mobili
ty, communication, cognition, and memory. Fourteen of the measurement
areas are concurrently scored by a nurse and a specified rehabilitatio
n therapist, resulting in a total of 31 items. Results: Consistent wit
h findings reported for other functional status measures, the analysis
indicated that the LORS-m consists of two unidimensional scales, an A
DL/mobility scale, and a communication/cognition scale. Although all s
cales fit the Rasch measurement model, the ADL/mobility scale used at
admission was most appropriately targeted to the ability level of the
sample. At discharge, the ADL scale was generally too easy because the
ability level of the sample moved upward towards functional independe
nce. The communication/cognition scale at both admission and discharge
showed a similar ''ceiling'' effect. Conclusions: These findings indi
cate the importance of determining the measurement qualities of functi
onal status measures for both admission and discharge ratings. Analyse
s, such as Rasch, can provide a logical direction for instrument refin
ement. (C) 1995 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine an
d the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation