Validity and reliability study of the Turkish version of Spinal Cord Independence Measure-III

Abstract

Study design: This is a multicenter, prospective study. Objectives: The objective of this study was to assess the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of Spinal Cord Independence Measure-III (SCIM-III). Setting: This study was conducted in rehabilitation centers of three hospitals in Turkey. Methods: Two-hundred and four (n = 204) consecutive patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) were included in the study. Each patient was examined by two physicians. Neurologic impairment was measured according to the American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) Impairment Scale (AIS) 2000 revised criteria. Backward and forward translation of SCIM-III was performed by native speakers in both languages. To measure the validity of SCIM-III, the scores were compared with patients' AIS grades, total motor scores and the Health Survey Short Form-36 (SF-36) subscale scores. SCIM-III was analyzed for test-retest reliability by the same rater on 49 patients during the follow-up evaluations. Results: Total agreement values between raters changed between 75.9 and 100%. Kappa values were all above 0.6, and they were statistically significant. The Pearson's correlation values between the raters were very high and statistically significant. The Cronbach's α-values for the two consecutive raters were 0.865 and 0.896. Test-retest reliability was assessed by paired samples t-test, and no significant difference was observed. SCIM-III and SF-36 physical (r = 0.339, Po0.005) and general health scores (r = 0.200, Po0.005) showed correlation. All subscales of the SCIM-III, with the exception of self-care, had significant differences in comparison with the AIS grades. SCIM-III total and total motor scores showed correlation (r = 0.585, Po0.001).

Lack of knowledge and training are the major obstacles in application of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM) in China

“…Even though a Chinese translation of SCIM III has been published in a Chinese journal, 18 the knowledge about it was limited, as only 18 out of 125 attendees had heard about it. Unlike the well-validated SCIM III translations in to other languages, [11][12][13][14][15][16][17] the authors 18 did not describe the translation process, thus the reader cannot know if the translation is in accordance with the recommendations. 25 The authors also investigated the validity and reliability of the Chinese SCIM III, 26 but several limitations were obvious in their study.…”

“…Reliability and validity of these translated versions have been evaluated. [11][12][13][14][15] The self-report version of SCIM has also been developed and translated into several languages. 16,17 However, although the Chinese version has been available since October 2007, 18 it has not been well used.…”

Do spinal cord-injured individuals with stronger sense of coherence use different psychological defense styles?

“…The validity and reliability of this measurement tool has been widely demonstrated. 16,17 Other assessed variables that were related to SCI were utilized transport device (e.g. wheelchair, cane, brace), coincidental head injury and suicidal ideation.…”

An investigation into the validity and reliability of the Chinese version of Spinal Cord Independence Measure III (SCIM III)

“…Since the original English version of SCIM III was released, it has been translated into several languages, and its good cross-cultural comparability has been proved. 6–13 However, our previous study showed that SCIM is still not well recognised and used in China, and a significant obstacle in using SCIM in clinical practise is the lack of confidence in understanding the English language of the original scale. 14 Although a Chinese translation of SCIM III was reported in a Chinese journal, 15 the authors did not describe the translation process.…”