Concurrent validity and responsiveness of Traffic Light System-BasicADL (TLS-BasicADL)

Figures & data

Figure 1. Example of TLS-BasicADL protocol.

Table 1. Patient demographic characteristics of the concurrent validity study group (mixed diagnosis) and responsiveness study group (hip fracture).

Characteristics	Concurrent validity study N = 50	Responsiveness study N = 106
Age: Years, mean ± SD	74.3 ± 13.4	81.2 ± 7.9
range	33–91	65–98
Gender: Female: n (%)	34 (68)	96 (76)
Male: n (%)	16 (32)	30 (24)
Main diagnosis
Orthopaedic	6	106
Cancer (lung, prostrate, breast)	30
Cardiovascular	4
Neurological	3
Respiratory	2
Other (infection, falls)	5

Table 2. Correlation between individual item scores of Traffic Light System-BasicADL and modified Functional Independence Measure and Barthel Index, respectively.

Item	TLS/modified FIM	TLS/modified BI
1. Lying to sitting	0.914**	0.925**
2. Sitting to lying	0.913**	0.929**
3. Sitting to standing	0.933**	0.936**
4. Bed to chair	0.933**	0.959**
5. Chair to bed	0.941**	0.970**
6. Gait/wheelchair	0.875**	0.818**
7. Hygiene upper body	0.946**	0.905**
8. Hygiene lower body	0.879**	0.805**
9. Bathing/shower	0.637**	0.815**
10. Dressing upper body	0.908**	0.882**
11. Dressing lower body	0.825**	0.772**
12. Toileting	0.908**	0.933**
13. Eating/drinking	0.649**	1.000**

**Spearman’s rho, significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Bold values show the outcome measure TLS-BasicADL correlates highest with for each item.

TLS: Traffic Light System-BasicADL; FIM: modified Functional Independence Measure; BI: Barthel Index.

Table 3. Correlation between total scores of Traffic Light System-BasicADL and modified Functional Independence Measure and Barthel Index, respectively.

Assessment measures	Spearmans rho correlation	p-Value
TLS-BasicADL and modified FIM	0.979	p < 0.000
TLS-BasicADL and modified BI	0.965	p < 0.000

TLS: Traffic Light System-BasicADL; FIM: modified Functional Independence Measure; BI: Barthel Index.

Figure 2. Distribution of TLS-BasicADL scores. Proportion of patients requiring help, supervision or independent in the individual items of transfers and gait prior to admission, post-op, at discharge and 1-month post-discharge.

Figure 3. Distribution of TLS-BasicADL scores. Proportion of patients requiring help, supervision or independent in the individual items of ADL prior to admission, post-op, at discharge and 1-month post-discharge.

Table 4. Correlations between differences in scores for modified Katz Index and Traffic Light System-BasicADL at both item level and total scores for time periods; pre-fracture status to discharge and discharge to 1-month follow-up.

ADL items	Correlations between differences in scores Pre-fracture – discharge Spearman’s rho	Correlations between differences in scores Discharge – 1 month Spearman’s rho
Katz bathing/TLS upper hygiene	0.134	0.157
TLS lower hygiene	0.416***	0.004
TLS bathing	0.777***	0.563***
Katz dressing/TLS upper dressing	0.132	0.048
TLS lower dressing	0.859***	0.687***
Katz toileting/TLS gait	0.662***	0.344***
TLS toileting	0.833***	0.632***
Katz transfers/TLS lying to sitting	0.589***	0.389***
TLS sitting to lying	0.660***	0.365***
TLS sit to stand	0.703***	0.441***
TLS bed to chair	0.693***	0.420***
TLS chair to bed	0.718***	0.423***
Katz food intake/TLS food intake	0	0
Katz total score/TLS total score	0.897***	0.597***

***Correlation is significant, p < 0.001.

Katz: Katz Index; TLS: Traffic Light System-BasicADL.