Abstract
Objective
To combine items from the Functional Independence Measure, Minimum Data Set (MDS)
2.0, and the Outcome and Assessment Information Set (OASIS)-B to reliably measure
cognition across postacute care settings and facilitate future studies of patient
cognitive recovery.
Design
Rasch analysis of data from a prospective, observational cohort study.
Setting
Postacute care inclusive of inpatient rehabilitation facilities, skilled nursing facilities,
and home health agencies.
Participants
Patients (N=147) receiving rehabilitation services.
Interventions
Not applicable.
Main Outcome Measures
Functional Independence Measure, MDS 2.0, and the OASIS-B.
Results
Six cognition items demonstrated good construct validity with no misfitting items,
unidimensionality, good precision (person separation reliability, 0.95), and an item
hierarchy that reflected a clinically meaningful continuum of cognitive challenge.
Conclusions
This is the first attempt to combine the cognition items from the 3 historically,
federally mandated assessments to create a common metric for cognition. These 6 items
could be adopted as standardized patient assessment data elements to improve cognitive
assessment across postacute care settings.
Keywords
List of abbreviations:
FIM (Functional Independence Measure), HH (home health), IRF (inpatient rehabilitation facility), LTM (long-term memory), MDS (Minimum Data Set), OASIS (Outcome and Assessment Information Set), PAC (postacute care), SPADE (standardized patient assessment data elements), STM (short-term memory), SNF (skilled nursing facility)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 accessOne-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:
Subscribe to Archives of Physical Medicine and RehabilitationAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Predictors of resource use after acute hospitalization: the Northern Manhattan Stroke Study.Neurology. 2000; 55: 1180-1187
- Domain-specific trends in cognitive impairment after acute ischaemic stroke.J Neurol. 2013; 260: 237-241
- Cognition in stroke rehabilitation and recovery research: consensus-based core recommendations from the second Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable.Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2019; 33: 943-950
- Disability and use of rehabilitation services following stroke in Rochester, Minnesota, 1975-1979.Stroke. 1987; 18: 830-836
- Development of an applied cognition scale to measure rehabilitation outcomes.Arch phys med rehabil. 2004; 85: 2030-2035
- Uniform patient assessment for post-acute care: final report.Aurora: University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center, 2006
- IMPACT Act of 2014 data standardization & cross setting measures.(Available at:)
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid. Input on Standardized Patient Assessment Data Elements (SPADEs) received after November 27, 2018 stakeholder meeting. 2019.
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid. National field test assessment protocol: admission. Baltimore, MD: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Available at: https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality-Initiatives-Patient-Assessment-Instruments/Post-Acute-Care-Quality-Initiatives/Downloads/National-Field-Test-Assessment-Protocol_Admission.pdf. 2017, Accessed August 24, 2020.
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid. National field test assessment protocol: non-communicative. Baltimore, MD: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Available at: https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality-Initiatives-Patient-Assessment-Instruments/Post-Acute-Care-Quality-Initiatives/Downloads/National-Field-Test-Assessment-Protocol_Non-Communicative.pdf. 2017, Accessed August 24, 2020.
- Common-person equating with the Rasch model.Appl Psychol Meas. 1985; 9: 73-82
- Comparison of discharge functional status after rehabilitation in skilled nursing, home health, and medical rehabilitation settings for patients after hip fracture repair.Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2014; 95: 209-217
- A comparison of discharge functional status after rehabilitation in skilled nursing, home health, and medical rehabilitation settings for patients after lower-extremity joint replacement surgery.Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011; 92: 712-720
- The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.Ann Intern Med. 2007; 147: 573-577
Tennant A. Guidelines for reporting studies using Rasch analysis. J Rehabil Med. Available at: https://www.medicaljournals.se/jrm/guidelines-for-reporting-studies-using-rasch-analysis. Accessed August 24, 2020.
- The Rasch measurement model in rheumatology: what is it and why use it? When should it be applied, and what should one look for in a Rasch paper?.Arthritis Rheum. 2007; 57: 1358
- The reliability of the functional independence measure: a quantitative review.Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1996; 77: 1226-1232
- The Functional Independence Measure: tests of scaling assumptions, structure, and reliability across 20 diverse impairment categories.Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1996; 77: 1101-1108
- A validation of the Functional Independence Measurement and its performance among rehabilitation inpatients.Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993; 74: 531-536
- Reliability estimates for the Minimum Data Set for nursing home resident assessment and care screening (MDS).Gerontologist. 1995; 35: 172-178
- Psychometric characteristics of the minimum data set II: validity.J Am Geriatr Soc. 1998; 46: 736-744
- Translating measures across the continuum of care: using Rasch analysis to create a crosswalk between the Functional Independence Measure and the Minimum Data Set.J Rehabil Res Dev. 2007; 44: 467-478
- Rasch analysis of Minimum Data Set mandated in skilled nursing facilities.J Rehabil Res Dev. 2008; 45: 1385
- Measuring disability in Medicare home care patients: application of Rasch modeling to the outcome and assessment information set.Med Care. 2003; 41: 601-615
- Deliverable 27: OASIS Field Test Summary Report.Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Baltimore2018
- Applying the Rasch model fundamental measurement in the human sciences.3rd edition. Taylor & Francis, New York2015
- Rasch analysis of repeated measures.Rasch Meas Trans. 2011; : 1317
- Sample size and item calibrations stability.Rasch Meas Trans. 1994; 7
- Patient-reported cognitive and communicative functioning: 1 construct or 2?.Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010; 91: 400-406
- A user's guide to WINSTEPS & MINISTEP Rasch-model computer programs. Program Manual 4.3.1.(Available at:) (Accessed May 10, 2019)
- Table 23.1, 23.11, ...principal components/contrast plots of item loadings.(Available at:)https://www.winsteps.com/winman/table23_1.htmDate accessed: May 10, 2019
Linacre JM. WINSTEPS help. Available at: https://www.winsteps.com/a/Winsteps-Manual.pdf. Accessed May 10, 2019.
- Using item mean squares to evaluate fit to the Rasch model.J Outcome Meas. 1998; 2: 66-78
- Table 23. Variance components for items.(Available at:) (Accessed May 10, 2019)
- Dimensionality investigation--an example.(Available at:)https://www.winsteps.com/winman/multidimensionality.htmDate accessed: May 10, 2019
- Foundations of clinical research: application to practice.3rd ed. F.A. Davis Company, Philadelphia2015
- Criteria for assessing the tools of disability outcomes research.Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2000; 81: S15-20
- Selecting a generic measure of health-related quality of life for use among older adults: a comparison of candidate instruments.Eval Health Prof. 1998; 21: 244-264
- Separation, reliability and skewed distributions: statistically different sample-independent levels of performance.Rasch Meas Trans. 2001; 14
- Validation and clinical utility of the executive function performance test in persons with traumatic brain injury.Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2017; 27: 603-617
- Further development of the Multiple Errands Test: standardized scoring, reliability, and ecological validity for the Baycrest version.Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009; 90: S41-51
- Introduction to cognitive rehabilitation.The Guilford Press, New York1989
- What are the differences between long-term, short-term, and working memory?.Essence Mem. 2008; 169: 323-338
- The Cognitive Disabilities Reconsidered Model: rehabilitation of adults with dementia.in: Katz N. Cognition, occupation, and participation across the life span. 3rd ed. AOTA Press, Bethesda2011
- A cortical-hippocampal system for declarative memory.Nat Rev Neurosci. 2000; 1: 41-50
- IRF-PAI training manual.Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Baltimore2002
- Translating measurement findings into rehabilitation practice: an example using Fugl-Meyer Assessment-Upper Extremity with patients following stroke.J Rehabil Res Dev. 2011; 48: 1211-1222
- Rasch analysis staging methodology to classify upper extremity movement impairment after stroke.Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013; 94: 1527-1533
- Diversity of approaches in assessment of executive functions in stroke: limited evidence?.eNeurologicalSci. 2015; 1: 12-20
- Working memory: the what, the why, and the how.Aust Educ Dev Psychol. 2013; 30: 105-118
- Clinical reasoning in cognitive rehabilitation therapy.NeuroRehabilitation. 2014; 34: 15
Article info
Publication history
Published online: August 01, 2020
Footnotes
Supported in part by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research and Training Center on Measuring Rehabilitation Outcomes and Effectiveness (grant no. H133B040032; PI: Heinemann; 12/1/2004-11/30/2011). Dr Cogan is supported by a Polytrauma/TBI Advance Fellowship from the Veterans Health Administration Office of Academic Affairs.
Disclosures: Dr Mallinson reports grants from National Institute of Disability and Rehabilitation Research during the conduct of the primary data collection (prior to the conduct of this study), grants from Lewin Group, and grants from Truven Health Analytics outside the submitted work. The other authors have nothing to disclose.
Identification
Copyright
© 2020 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine
