Inter- and intra-tester reliability of the acute brain injury physiotherapy assessment (ABIPA) in patients with acquired brain injury

Background: The Acute Brain Injury Physiotherapy Assessment (ABIPA) is a new outcome measure with face validity and sensitivity to change in the early stages of neuromotor recovery after acquired brain injury (ABI). Reliability of physiotherapists using the tool has not been established. Objective: Determine inter- and intra-tester reliability of physiotherapists using the ABIPA. Methods: An observational study using video-recorded assessments of patient performance (n = 7) was undertaken with two cohorts of physiotherapists: those receiving training (n = 23) and those provided with guidelines only (n = 7) to administer the ABIPA. Results: Across all physiotherapists (n = 30), inter-tester reliability was excellent (α ≥ 0.9) for total ABIPA score. All individual items, except trunk alignment in supine (α = 0.5), showed excellent or good internal consistency (α ≥ 0.7). For intra-tester reliability, substantial or perfect agreement was achieved for eight items (weighted Kappa Kw ≥ 0.6), moderate agreement for four items (Kw = 0.4–0.6) and three items achieved fair agreement (alignment head supine: Kw = 0.289; alignment trunk supine: Kw = 0.387 and tone left upper limb: Kw = 0.366). Conclusion: Physiotherapists are highly consistent using the ABIPA but several items may need revision to improve intra-tester reliability.No Full Tex

Assessment of Health-Related Quality of Life after TBI: Comparison of a Disease-Specific (QOLIBRI) with a Generic (SF-36) Instrument

Psychosocial, emotional, and physical problems can emerge after traumatic brain injury (TBI), potentially impacting health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Until now, however, neither the discriminatory power of disease-specific (QOLIBRI) and generic (SF-36) HRQoL nor their correlates have been compared in detail. These aspects as well as some psychometric item characteristics were studied in a sample of 795 TBI survivors. The Shannon H' index absolute informativity, as an indicator of an instrument's power to differentiate between individuals within a specific group or health state, was investigated. Psychometric performance of the two instruments was predominantly good, generally higher, and more homogenous for the QOLIBRI than for the SF-36 subscales. Notably, the SF-36 "Role Physical," " Role Emotional," and "Social Functioning" subscales showed less satisfactory discriminatory power than all other dimensions or the sum scores of both instruments. The absolute informativity of disease-specific as well as generic HRQoL instruments concerning the different groups defined by different correlates differed significantly. When the focus is on how a certain subscale or sum score differentiates between individuals in one specific dimension/health state, the QOLIBRI can be recommended as the preferable instrument

Guidelines for Quality Management of Apallic Syndrome / Vegetative State.

Item does not contain fulltex