Rasch analysis of the Rivermead Mobility Index: A study using mobility measures of first-stroke inpatients


      Antonucci G, Aprile T, Paolucci S. Rasch analysis of the Rivermead Mobility Index: a study using mobility measures of first-stroke patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002;83:1442-9. Objective: To evaluate the validity and item unidimensionality of the Rivermead Mobility Index (RMI) by using Rasch analysis. Design: Application of Rasch analysis on the RMI partial data set. Setting: A stroke program at a rehabilitation hospital in Italy. Participants: A total of 308 consecutive patients (155 women, 153 men; avg age, 62.79±11.94y) hospitalized between 1990 and 1996. Average interval between stroke onset and admission was 52.48±36.22 days. Intervention: Medical inpatient rehabilitation. Main Outcome Measures: Patients' mobility status was assessed using the RMI administered at admission and discharge. Ratings were assigned by 4 staff members working as a team. We performed separate Rasch analyses on the RMI data, gathered from different groups of first stroke inpatients examined before and after rehabilitation treatment. Results: asch analysis showed the overall good validity of the RMI, except for item 15, which did not fit the unidimensional continuum estimated through the Rasch rating model. Conclusion: The RMI is a unidimensional scale with a hierarchy of easy-to-hard test questions. Item difficulty level was stable when processed on different groups of patients assessed on different occasions. © 2002 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine and the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Wright BD
        • Linacre JM.
        Observations are always ordinal; measurement, however, must be interval.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1989; 70: 857-860
        • Granger CV
        • Deutsch A
        • Linn RT.
        Rasch analysis of the functional independence measure (FIM™) mastery test.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1998; 79: 52-57
        • Velozo CA
        • Kielhofner G
        • Lai JS.
        The use of Rasch analysis to produce scale free measurement of functional ability.
        Am J Occup Ther. 1999; 53: 83-90
        • Jones LV
        • Appelbaum MI.
        Psychometrics methods.
        Ann Rev Psychol. 1989; 40: 23-43
        • Rasch G.
        Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests.
        Univ Chicago Pr, Chicago1980
        • Andrich D.
        Application of a psychometric rating model to ordered categories which are scored with successive integers.
        Appl Psychol Meas. 1978; 2: 581-594
        • Samejima F.
        Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern for graded scores.
        Psychometrika Suppl. 1969; : 17
        • Guttman L.
        A basis for scaling qualitative data.
        Am Sociol Rev. 1944; 9: 139-150
        • Mokken RJ
        • Lewis C.
        A nonparametric approach to the analysis of dichotomous item responses.
        Appl Psychol Meas. 1982; 6: 417-430
        • Andrich D.
        An elaboration of Guttman scaling with Rasch model for measurement.
        in: Sociological methodology. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco1985: 33-80
        • Bond T
        • Fox C.
        Applying the Rasch model: fundamental measurement in the human sciences.
        Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (NJ)2001
        • Wright BD.
        A history of social science measurement.
        Educ Meas Iss Pract. 1997; 16 (52): 33-45
        • McArthur D.
        Rasch analysis of functional assessment scales: an example using pain behaviors.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1991; 72: 296-303
        • Merbitz C
        • Morris J
        • Grip JC.
        Ordinal scales and foundations of misinference.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1989; 70: 308-312
        • Dickinson HG
        • Kohler F.
        The multidimensionality of the FIM motor items precludes an interval scaling using Rasch analysis.
        Scand J Rehabil Med. 1996; 26: 159-162
        • Baker GJ
        • Granger CV
        • Fiedler RC.
        A brief outpatient functional assessment measure. Validity using Rasch measures.
        Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1997; 76: 8-13
        • Velozo CA
        • Magalhaes LC
        • Pann AW
        • Leiter P.
        Functional scale discrimination at admission and discharge: Rasch analysis of the Level of Rehabilitation Scale III.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1985; 76: 705-712
        • Collen FM
        • Wade DT
        • Robb GF
        • Bradshaw CM.
        The Rivermead Mobility Index: a further development of the Rivermead Motor Assessment.
        Int Disabil Stud. 1991; 13: 50-54
        • Paolucci S
        • Antonucci G
        • Traballesi M
        • Lubich S
        • Pratesi L.
        Predicting stroke inpatient rehabilitation outcome: the prominent role of neuropsychological disorders.
        Eur Neurol. 1996; 36: 385-390
        • Vaney C
        • Blaurock H
        • Gatter B
        • Meiseds C.
        Assessing mobility in multiple sclerosis using the Rivermead Mobility Index and gait speed.
        Clin Rehabil. 1996; 10: 216-226
        • Fuller KJ
        • Dawson K
        • Wiles CM.
        Physiotherapy in chronic multiple sclerosis: a controlled trial.
        Clin Rehabil. 1996; 10: 195-204
        • Paolucci S
        • Antonucci G
        • Guariglia C
        • Magnotti L
        • Pizzamiglio L
        • Zoccolotti P.
        Facilitatory effect of neglect rehabilitation on the recovery of left hemiplegic stroke patients: a crossover study.
        J Neurol. 1996; 243: 308-314
        • Paolucci S
        • Antonucci G
        • Pratesi L
        • Traballesi M
        • Lubich S
        • Grasso MG.
        Functional outcome in stroke inpatient rehabilitation: predicting no, low and high response patients.
        Cerebrovasc Dis. 1998; 8: 228-234
        • Paolucci S
        • Grasso MG
        • Antonucci G
        • et al.
        Mobility status after inpatient stroke rehabilitation: 1-year follow-up and prognostic factors.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001; 82: 2-8
        • Hsieh CL
        • Hsueh IP
        • Mao HF.
        Validity and responsiveness of the Rivermead Mobility Index in stroke patients.
        Scand J Rehabil Med. 2000; 32: 140-142
        • Foulkes MA
        • Wolf PA
        • Price TR
        • Mohr JP
        • Hier DP.
        The stroke data bank: design, methods and baseline characteristics.
        Stroke. 1988; 19: 547-554
        • Pizzamiglio L
        • Judica A
        • Razzano C
        • Zoccolotti P.
        Toward a comprehensive diagnosis of visual-spatial disorders in unilateral brain damaged patients.
        Psychol Assess. 1989; 5: 199-218
        • Chang WC
        • Chan C.
        Rasch analysis for outcome measures: some methodological considerations.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1995; 76: 934-939
        • Andrich D.
        Rasch models for measurement.
        Sage, Beverly Hills (CA)1988
        • Andrich D
        • De'Ath G
        • Lyne H
        • Hill P
        • Jennings J.
        DISLOC: a program for analyzing a Rasch model with two item parameters.
        State Educ Dept, Nedlands (Aust)1982
        • Masters GN
        • Adams RJ
        • Lokan J.
        Mapping student achievement.
        Int J Educ Res. 1994; 21: 595-610
        • Wade DT.
        Neurologic rehabilitation.
        Curr Opin Neurol. 1993; 6: 753-755
        • McGrath JR
        • Davis AM.
        Rehabilitation: where are we going and how do we get there?.
        Clin Rehabil. 1992; 6: 225-235