2003
DOI: 10.1093/ptj/83.10.888
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Establishing Minimal Clinically Important Differences for Scores on the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory for Inpatient Rehabilitation

Abstract: Background and Purpose. Standardized pediatric assessment tools such as the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory (PEDI) numerically quantify changes during rehabilitation through test scores, but they are unable to provide client-specific information regarding important changes in function. The purpose of this study was to identify the smallest change in PEDI scores during inpatient rehabilitation that was considered to be a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) by physical therapists and othe… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
53
0
1

Year Published

2003
2003
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 123 publications
(56 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
2
53
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…A key factor when considering the clinical utility of a measure is its administrative burden. The Klein-Bell ADL 45 Goodness of fit: 90% to AMPS-M, 95% to AMPS-P (n = 162, 3-15 y, well children) 31 Moderate correlations between AMPS-M and COPM-P r = 0.67, and AMPS-P and COPM-S r = 0.64 (n = 33, 3-15 y, DCD/CP/ASD/other) 46 KGM: Distinguish between healthy individuals and individuals with multiple sclerosis, stroke, Alzheimer and psychiatric disorders 21 No equivalent assessment method Moderate correlation between AMPS and FIM r = -0.62 (persons with dementia) 21 Moderate-excellent correlations between AMPS and SIB r = 0.62-0.85 21 Progression of age-related mean scores; meets assumption of developmental progression of adaptive behaviour 27 Significant difference between 5 out of 7 supplementary norm groups (children and adults with various disabilities) compared to standardisation mean 27 VABS DLS explains variance in GMFCS, cognitive impairment, and age (p < 0.001) (n = 110, 9-13 y, CP) 54 VABS DLS (Personal) and ABILHAND-Kids: adj r 2 = 0.84, MACS adj r 2 = 0.77 VABS DLS (Domestic) and ABILHAND-Kids: adj r 2 = 0.62, MACS adj r 2 = 0.45 (n = 94, 12-16 y, CP) 44 Moderate to strong correlations between VABS DLS and Capacity Profile domains: adj r 2 = 0.85 (n = 94, 12-16 y, CP) 55 WeeFIM Adapted from adult Functional Independence Measure (FIM); review by 8 interdisciplinary experts 56 Principal Component Analysis identified two distinct dimensions: motor and cognitive 28 Direct relationship between WeeFIM Self-Care domain and GMFCS level 57 Discriminates between patterns of CP; ceiling effect for children with hemiplegia and diplegia undergoing lower limb surgery 39 Correlation between PODCI Upper Extremity domain and WeeFIM Self Care: r = 0.68 58 WeeFIM 36 Responsive over time 63,64 and sensitive to change after SDR, 65 CIMT, 34 and botulinum toxin type-A injections: SC domain, 66 Scale requires 60 to 180 minutes for administration which significantly reduces its clinical utility. The ABILHAND-Kids was the quickest assessment to administer and score, taking only 5 to 10 minutes for administration.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A key factor when considering the clinical utility of a measure is its administrative burden. The Klein-Bell ADL 45 Goodness of fit: 90% to AMPS-M, 95% to AMPS-P (n = 162, 3-15 y, well children) 31 Moderate correlations between AMPS-M and COPM-P r = 0.67, and AMPS-P and COPM-S r = 0.64 (n = 33, 3-15 y, DCD/CP/ASD/other) 46 KGM: Distinguish between healthy individuals and individuals with multiple sclerosis, stroke, Alzheimer and psychiatric disorders 21 No equivalent assessment method Moderate correlation between AMPS and FIM r = -0.62 (persons with dementia) 21 Moderate-excellent correlations between AMPS and SIB r = 0.62-0.85 21 Progression of age-related mean scores; meets assumption of developmental progression of adaptive behaviour 27 Significant difference between 5 out of 7 supplementary norm groups (children and adults with various disabilities) compared to standardisation mean 27 VABS DLS explains variance in GMFCS, cognitive impairment, and age (p < 0.001) (n = 110, 9-13 y, CP) 54 VABS DLS (Personal) and ABILHAND-Kids: adj r 2 = 0.84, MACS adj r 2 = 0.77 VABS DLS (Domestic) and ABILHAND-Kids: adj r 2 = 0.62, MACS adj r 2 = 0.45 (n = 94, 12-16 y, CP) 44 Moderate to strong correlations between VABS DLS and Capacity Profile domains: adj r 2 = 0.85 (n = 94, 12-16 y, CP) 55 WeeFIM Adapted from adult Functional Independence Measure (FIM); review by 8 interdisciplinary experts 56 Principal Component Analysis identified two distinct dimensions: motor and cognitive 28 Direct relationship between WeeFIM Self-Care domain and GMFCS level 57 Discriminates between patterns of CP; ceiling effect for children with hemiplegia and diplegia undergoing lower limb surgery 39 Correlation between PODCI Upper Extremity domain and WeeFIM Self Care: r = 0.68 58 WeeFIM 36 Responsive over time 63,64 and sensitive to change after SDR, 65 CIMT, 34 and botulinum toxin type-A injections: SC domain, 66 Scale requires 60 to 180 minutes for administration which significantly reduces its clinical utility. The ABILHAND-Kids was the quickest assessment to administer and score, taking only 5 to 10 minutes for administration.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…FOCUS change scores were evaluated to determine whether or not a 'minimal clinically important difference' (MCID) had occurred. A 'minimal clinically important difference' (MCID) is defined as minimal changes in the child's function that are considered to be important to both the clinician and parent (Iyer et al 2003). At the end of treatment, parent and speechlanguage pathologists were independently asked to complete a Parent training = 14% *The top three medical diagnoses for each group are reported.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…8,9 When clinicians are raters, the VAS validly identifies the minimal clinically important difference on the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory. 10 Based on these two parameters, combined with regular visits to our outpatient department (LS and JSHV), a decision was made with the parents either to continue the drug or taper it off.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%