Advertisement

Reliability Validity and Responsiveness of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure 4th Version in a Multicultural Setup

Published:October 19, 2021DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2021.07.811

      Abstract

      Objective

      To examine the fourth version of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure for reliability and validity.

      Design

      Partly blinded comparison with the criterion standard Spinal Cord Independence Measure III, and between examiners and examinations.

      Setting

      A multicultural cohort from 19 spinal cord injury units in 11 countries.

      Participants

      A total of 648 patients with spinal cord injury.

      Intervention

      Assessment with Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM IV) and Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM III) on admission to inpatient rehabilitation and before discharge.

      Main outcome measures

      SCIM IV interrater reliability, internal consistency, correlation with and difference from SCIM III, and responsiveness.

      Results

      Total agreement between examiners was above 80% on most SCIM IV tasks. All Kappa coefficients were above 0.70 and statistically significant (P<.001). Pearson's coefficients of the correlation between the examiners were above 0.90, and intraclass correlation coefficients were above 0.90. Cronbach's alpha was above 0.96 for the entire SCIM IV, above 0.66 for the subscales, and usually decreased when an item was eliminated. Reliability values were lower for the subscale of respiration and sphincter management, and on admission than at discharge. SCIM IV and SCIM III mean values were very close, and the coefficients of Pearson correlation between them were 0.91-0.96 (P<.001). The responsiveness of SCIM IV was not significantly different from that of SCIM III in most of the comparisons.

      Conclusions

      The validity, reliability, and responsiveness of SCIM IV, which was adjusted to assess specific patient conditions or situations that SCIM III does not address, and which includes more accurate definitions of certain scoring criteria, are very good and quite similar to those of SCIM III. SCIM IV can be used for clinical and research trials, including international multi-center studies, and its group scores can be compared with those of SCIM III.

      Keywords

      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:

      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

      References

        • Catz A
        • Itzkovich M
        • Agranov E
        • Ring H
        • Tamir A.
        SCIM - spinal cord independence measure: a new disability scale for patients with spinal cord lesions.
        Spinal Cord. 1997; 35: 850-856
        • Catz A
        • Itzkovitch M
        • Steinberg F
        • et al.
        The Catz-Itzkovich SCIM: a revised version of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure.
        Disability and Rehabilitation. 2001; 23: 263-268
        • Itzkovich M
        • Tripolski M
        • Zeilig G
        • et al.
        Rasch analysis of the Catz-Itzkovich Spinal Cord Independence Measure.
        Spinal Cord. 2002; 40: 396-407
        • Itzkovich M
        • Gelernter I
        • Biering-Sorensen F
        • et al.
        The Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM) version III: reliability and validity in a multi-center international study.
        Disabil Rehabil. 2007; 29: 1926-1933
        • Catz A
        • Itzkovich M
        • Tesio L
        • et al.
        A multi-center international study on the Spinal Cord Independence Measure, version III: Rasch psychometric validation.
        Spinal Cord. 2007; 45: 275-291
        • Cho DY
        • Shin HI
        • Kim HR
        • et al.
        Reliability and validity of the Korean version of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure-III (KSCIM-III).
        Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2020; 99: 305-309
        • Kumar S
        • Khushboo Panwar P
        • Garg S
        • Kalra S
        • Yadav J
        Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of Spinal Cord Independence Measure version III in Hindi language.
        Ann Indian Acad Neurol. 2020; 23: 98-102
        • Derakhshanrad N
        • Saberi H
        • Yekaninejad M
        • Joghataei M.
        Subcutaneous granulocyte colony-stimulating factor administration for subacute traumatic spinal cord injuries, report of neurological and functional outcomes: a double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial.
        J Neurosurg Spine. 2018; 30: 19-30
        • Abualait T
        • Ibrahim Alaa I
        Spinal direct current simulation with locomotor training in chronic spinal cord injury.
        Saudi Med J. 2020; 41: 88-93
        • Cheung EYY
        • Yu KKK
        • Kwan RLC
        • Ng CKM
        • Chau RMW
        • Cheing GLY.
        Effect of EMG-biofeedback Robotic-assisted body weight supported treadmill training on walking ability and cardiopulmonary Function on people with subacute spinal cord injuries—a randomized controlled trial.
        BMC Neurol. 2019; 19: 140
        • Jung JH
        • Lee HJ
        • Cho DY
        • et al.
        Effects of combined upper limb robotic therapy in patients with tetraplegic spinal cord injury.
        Ann Rehabil Med. 2019; 43: 445-457
        • Santamaria V
        • Luna T
        • Khan M
        • Agrawal S.
        The robotic trunk-support-trainer (TruST) to measure and increase postural workspace during sitting in people with spinal cord injury.
        Spinal Cord Ser Cases. 2020; 6: 1
        • Aguirre-Güemez AV
        • Mendoza-Muñoz M
        • Jiménez-Coello G
        • et al.
        Nerve transfer rehabilitation in tetraplegia: comprehensive assessment and treatment. Program to improve upper extremity function before and after nerve transfer surgery, a case report.
        J Spinal Cord Med. 2021; 44: 621-626
        • Kee KM
        • Mohamad NZ
        • Koh PPW.
        Return to work after spinal cord injury: a Singaporean pilot community-based rehabilitation program.
        Spinal Cord. 2020; 58: 1096-1103
        • Donhauser M
        • Grassner L
        • Klein B
        • et al.
        Severe pressure ulcers requiring surgery impair the functional outcome after acute spinal cord injury.
        Spinal Cord. 2020; 58: 70-77
        • Osterthun R
        • Tjalma TA
        • Spijkerman DCM
        • et al.
        Functional independence of persons with long-standing motor complete spinal cord injury in the Netherlands.
        J Spinal Cord Med. 2020; 43: 380-387
        • Tomioka Y
        • Uemura O
        • Ishii R
        • Liu M.
        Using a logarithmic model to predict functional independence after spinal cord injury: a retrospective study.
        Spinal Cord. 2019; 57: 1048-1056
        • Richard-Denis A
        • Chatta R
        • Thompson C
        • Mac-Thiong JM.
        Patterns and predictors of functional recovery from the subacute to the chronic phase following a traumatic spinal cord injury: a prospective study.
        Spinal Cord. 2020; 58: 43-52
        • Ariji Y
        • Hayashi T
        • Ideta R
        • et al.
        A prediction model of functional outcome at 6 months using clinical findings of a person with traumatic spinal cord injury at 1 month after injury.
        Spinal Cord. 2020; 58: 1158-1165
        • Biering-Sørensen F
        • Cohen S
        • Rodriguez GM
        • Tausk K
        • Martin J.
        Electronic medical record: data collection and reporting for spinal cord injury.
        Spinal Cord Ser Cases. 2018; 4: 70
        • Mulcahey MJ
        • Thielen CC
        • Sadowsky C
        • et al.
        Despite limitations in content range, the SCIM-III is reproducible and a valid indicator of physical function in youths with spinal cord injury and dysfunction.
        Spinal Cord. 2018; 56: 332-340
        • Anderson K
        • Aito S
        • Atkins M
        • et al.
        Functional recovery measures for spinal cord injury: an evidence-based review for clinical practice and research.
        J Spinal Cord Med. 2008; 31: 133-144
        • Alexander MS
        • Anderson K
        • Biering-Sorensen F
        • et al.
        Outcome measures in spinal cord injury: recent assessments and recommendations for future directions.
        Spinal Cord. 2009; 47: 582-591
      1. Catz A. Spinal cord independence measure (SCIM). In: Kreutzer J, DeLuca J, Caplan B, editors. Encyclopedia of clinical neuropsychology. New York: Springer; 2017. p 1–4.

        • Derakhshanrad N
        • Saberi H
        • Yekaninejad M
        • et al.
        Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor administration for neurological improvement in patients with postrehabilitation chronic incomplete traumatic spinal cord injuries: a double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial.
        J Neurosurg Spine. 2018; 29: 97-107
        • Saberi H
        • Vosoughi F
        • Derakhshanrad N
        • et al.
        Development of Persian version of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure III assessed by interview: a psychometric study.
        Spinal Cord. 2018; 56: 980-986
        • Cd Almeida
        • Coelho JN
        • Riberto M.
        Applicability, validation and reproducibility of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure version III (SCIM III) in patients with non-traumatic spinal cord lesions.
        Disabil Rehabil. 2016; 38: 2229-2234
        • Lampart P
        • Gemperli A
        • Baumberger M
        • et al.
        Administration of assessment instruments during the first rehabilitation of patients with spinal cord injury: a retrospective chart analysis.
        Spinal Cord. 2018; 56: 322-331
        • Glass CA
        • Tesio L
        • Itzkovich M
        • et al.
        Spinal Cord Independence Measure, version III (SCIM-III): applicability to the United Kingdom spinal cord injured (SCI) population.
        J Rehabil Med. 2009; 41: 723-728
        • Anderson KD
        • Acuff ME
        • Arp BG
        • et al.
        United States (US) multi-center study to assess the validity and reliability of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM III).
        Spinal Cord. 2011; 49: 880-885
        • Xing H
        • Liu N
        • Biering-Sørensen F.
        An investigation into the validity and reliability of the Chinese version of Spinal Cord Independence Measure III (SCIM III).
        Clin Rehabil. 2021; 35: 436-445
        • Michailidou C
        • Marston L
        • De Souza LH.
        Translation into Greek and initial validity and reliability testing of a modified version of the SCIM III, in both English and Greek, for self-use.
        Disabil Rehabil. 2016; 38: 180-188
        • Unalan H
        • Misirlioglu TO
        • Erhan B
        • et al.
        Validity and reliability study of the Turkish version of Spinal Cord Independence Measure-III.
        Spinal Cord. 2015; 53: 455-460
        • Dawson-Saunders B
        • Trapp RG.
        Basic and clinical biostatistics.
        Appleton&Lange, Norwalk, Connecticut1994
        • McDowell I
        • Newell C.
        Measuring Health: A guide to rating scales and questionnaires.
        Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK1996
        • Marino RJ
        • Stineman MG.
        Functional assessment in spinal cord injury.
        Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil. 1996; 1: 32-45
        • Clark LA
        • Watson D.
        Constructing validity: basic issues in objective scale development.
        Psychol Assess. 1995; 7: 309-319
        • Scivoletto G
        • Tamburella F
        • Laurenza L
        • Molinari M.
        The spinal cord independence measure: how much change is clinically significant for spinal cord injury subjects.
        Disabil Rehabil. 2013; 35: 1808-1813
        • Benjamini Y
        • Hochberg Y.
        Controlling the False Discovery Rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing.
        J R Stat Soc Series B. 1995; 57: 289-300
        • Mokkinka LB.
        • Terweea CB
        • Patrick DL
        • et al.
        The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2010; 63: 737-745
        • Hays RD
        • Hadorn D.
        Responsiveness to change: an aspect of validity, not a separate dimension.
        Qual Life Res. 1992; 1: 73-75
        • Angst F.
        The new COSMIN guidelines confront traditional concepts of responsiveness.
        BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011; 11: 152