Relationship between self-reported function and disability and balance performance measures in the elderly

Abstract

Abstract-This study evaluated the reliability and validity of the Hebrew version of the Late-Life Function and Disability Instrument (LLFDI). Fifty-five older adults (mean age 79.7 +/-5.2) participated. We calculated test-retest reliability with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Partial correlations determined the construct validity with a balance measure (Berg Balance Scale [BBS]) and a mobility measure (Timed Up and Go [TUG] test). We examined known-group validity by comparing the scores of cane and noncane users. Test-retest ICCs ranged from good to excellent (0.77-0.90) for the function component and fair to good for the disability component (0.63-0.83), except for the disability management role subscale (0.46). BBS and TUG were associated with LLFDI overall function (r = 0.48, p < 0.001 and r = -0.52, p < 0.001, respectively). TUG and BBS were weakly associated with disability limitations (r = -0.26 and 0.32, respectively) and disability frequency (r = -0.16 and 0.24, respectively). Cane users showed significantly lower function scores than noncane users. We demonstrated that the Hebrew version of the LLFDI reliably and validly assesses older adults' function and disability. The LLFDI is recommended as an outcome instrument in studies in which older adults' function and disability are outcomes of interest.

Reliability and validity of the French-Canadian Late Life Function and Disability Instrument in community-living wheelchair-users

“…The mean scores in the participation component in this study were lower than previously reported scores of ambulatory older adults [9,14,28,29], despite the items being independent of mobility ability. This is consistent with other findings that wheelchair-users have lower rates of participation in leisure and physical activities than ambulatory individuals [30].…”

“…Not surprising, the scores are lower than those reported by individuals with ambulatory ability [10,14,28,29,31]. This is because the majority of the items that comprise the basic and advanced lower extremity activity domains require either a standing or walking ability.…”

“…Intraclass correlation coefficients 2,1 in the range of 0.40 to 0.74 represent moderate to good reliability, and ICCs 2,1 greater than or equal to 0.75 represent excellent reliability [24].Based on previous methodological studies of the LLFDI [9][10][11]14], we hypothesized that the ICC 2,1 would be at least moderate to good for all participation frequency and limitations scores. We also hypothesized that the ICC 2,1 would be in the excellent range for all of the activity scores.…”

“…For example, The LLFDI has been validated for use with several community-living, older adult populations, including those with multiple chronic conditions, osteoporosis, multiple sclerosis, stroke, heart disease, and cancer [11]. It has been used as an outcome measure in several intervention studies [12], and translated into Spanish [13], Hebrew [14], German [15],and Korean [16].…”

Rapid stepping test towards virtual visual objects: Feasibility and convergent validity in older adults

“…These measures were able to differentiate between fallers and non-fallers, while the use of functional tests such as the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) and the Timed Up and Go test (TUG) are less conclusive [19]. In follow-up studies, the RST measure was found to be valid [20] and reliable [21]. However, force platform assessments are often not feasible in the clinical setting, due to cost and technological issues.…”