The Neurological Impairment Scale: reliability and validity as a predictor of functional outcome in neurorehabilitation

References

• WHO. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Geneva: World Health Organisation; 2002. Report No.: ISBN 91 4 154542 9
   Google Scholar
• Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: the Barthel Index. Maryland State Med J 1965;14:61–5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Keith RA, Granger CV, Hamilton BB, Sherwin FS. The Functional Independence Measure: a new tool for rehabilitation. Adv Clin Rehabil 1987;1:6–18
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hamilton BB, Granger CV, Sherwin FS, et al. A uniform national data system for medical rehabilitation. In: Fuhrer JM, ed. Rehabilitation outcomes: analysis and measurement. Baltimore: Brookes 1987:13–47
   Google Scholar
• Hamilton BB, Laughlin JA, Fiedler RC, Granger CV. Interrater reliability of the 7-level Functional Independence Measure (FIM). Scand J Rehabil Med 1994;26:115–19
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hall KM, Hamilton BB, Gordon WA, Zasler ND. Characteristics and comparisons of functional assessment indices: disability rating scale, Functional Independence Measure, and Functional Assessment Measure. J Head Traum Rehabil 1993;8:60–74
   Google Scholar
• Hall KM, Mann N, High WMJ, et al. Functional measures after traumatic brain injury: ceiling effects of FIM, FIM+FAM, DRS, and CIQ. J Head Traum Rehabil 1996;11:27–39
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner-Stokes L, Nyein K, et al. The UK FIM+FAM: development and evaluation. Clin Rehabil 1999;13:277–87
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kidd D, Howard R, Losseff N, Thompson A. The benefit of inpatient rehabilitation in multiple sclerosis. Clin Rehabil 1995;9:198–203
   Google Scholar
• Sanjak M, Bravver E, Bockenek WL, et al. Supported treadmill ambulation for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a pilot study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2010;91:1920–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brott T, Adams Jr HP, Olinger CP, et al. Measurements of acute cerebral infarction: a clinical examination scale. Stroke 1989;20:864–70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maynard Jr FM, Bracken MB, Creasey G, et al. International standards for neurological and functional classification of spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 1997;35:266–74
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner-Stokes L, Williams H, Sephton K, et al. Engaging the hearts and minds of clinicians in outcome measurement – the UK Rehabilitation Outcomes Collaborative approach. Disabil Rehabil 2012;34:1871–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skinner A, Turner-Stokes L. The use of standardised outcome measures for rehabilitation in the UK. Clin Rehabil 2005;20:609–15
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner-Stokes L. Outcome measures for in-patient neurorehabilitation settings – a commentary. Neuropsychol Rehabil 1999;9:329–43
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WHO. International Classification of Impairment Disability and Handicaps (ICIDH). Geneva: World Health Organisation; 1980
   Google Scholar
• Siegert RJ, Turner-Stokes L, McCrone PM, et al. Evaluation of community rehabilitation service delivery in long-term neurological conditions: final report. London: National Institute of Heath Research, Health Services and Delivery Research Programme (Grant No: 0001833); 2012
   Google Scholar
• Pett MA, Lackey NR, Sullivan JJ. Making sense of factor analysis: the use of factor analysis for instrument development in health care research. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications; 2003
   Google Scholar
• Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159–74
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. 2nd edn. Hillsdale (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988
   Google Scholar
• Cepeda NJ. Effect size calculator. 2008. Available from: http://www.cognitiveflexibility.org/effectsize [last accessed 2012]
   Google Scholar
• Cameron ID, Schaafsma FG, Wilson S, et al. Outcomes of rehabilitation in older people – functioning and cognition are the most important predictors: an inception cohort study. J Rehabil Med 2012;44:24–30
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chumney D, Nollinger K, Shesko K, et al. Ability of functional independence measure to accurately predict functional outcome of stroke-specific population: systematic review. J Rehabil Res Dev 2010;47:17–29
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnes C, Conner D, Legault L, et al. Rehabilitation outcomes in cognitively impaired patients admitted to skilled nursing facilities from the community. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004;85:1602–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar