Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the “spinal cord injury-falls concern scale” in the Italian population

Study design: Psychometrics study. Objective: The objective of this study was to develop an Italian version of the Spinal Cord Injury-Falls Concern Scale (SCI-FCS) and examine its reliability and validity. Setting: Multicenter study in spinal units in Northern and Southern Italy. The scale also was administered to non-hospitalized outpatient clinic patients. Methods: The original scale was translated from English to Italian using the “Translation and Cultural Adaptation of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measures” guidelines. The reliability and validity of the culturally adapted scale were assessed following the “Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Status Measurement Instruments” checklist. The SCI-FCS-I internal consistency, inter-rater, and intra-rater reliability were examined using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and the intraclass correlation coefficient, respectively. Concurrent validity was evaluated using Pearson’s correlation coefficient with the Italian version of the short form of the Wheelchair Use Confidence Scale for Manual Wheelchair Users (WheelCon-M-I-short form). Results: The Italian version of the SCI-FCS-I was administered to 124 participants from 1 June to 30 September 2017. The mean ± SD of the SCI-FCS-I score was 16.73 ± 5.88. All SCI-FCS items were either identical or similar in meaning to the original version’s items. Cronbach’s α was 0.827 (p < 0.01), the inter-rater reliability was 0.972 (p < 0.01), and the intra-rater reliability was 0.973 (p < 0.01). Pearson’s correlation coefficient of the SCI-FCS-I scores with the WheelCon-M-I-short form was 0.56 (p < 0.01). Conclusions: The SCI-FCS-I was found to be reliable and a valid outcome measure for assessing manual wheelchair concerns about falling in the Italian population

Measuring Spinal Cord Injury

This book describes validated outcome measures for the international Spinal Cord Injury population. Based on rigorous systematic reviews of ca. 80,000 scientific articles, the authors present assessment tools for various clinical uses in the health sciences, following parameters of validity, reliability, and responsiveness. It is important for the development of clinical practice and research that practical and appropriate measures become universally accepted; this would allow comparisons and meta- analysis of high-quality randomized controlled trials of people with this increasingly common injury. This book emphasizes the need for consensus among researchers as to which tools must be studied in depth or adapted to other national contexts, or which measurement instruments should be standardized in order to develop universal norms and standards for the performance of people with Spinal Cord Injury. It offers a valuable practical guide for clinicians, rehabilitation professionals and nurses, but will also help researchers to gain more confidence in using valid and reliable assessment tools for comparable clinical trials

Research Perspectives and Considerations in Assessing Spinal Cord Injury Population

For identifying the best treatment methods and routines to help patients return to their previous lives, the first step is to identify the correct assessment tool to robustly assess the efficacy of interventions both at the level of clinical treatments and in the context of clinical trials. This systematic review aimed to provide clinicians and researchers information regarding existing outcome measures to assess people with SCI. Results of this systematic review show 298 assessment tools that evaluate people with SCI. Authors have described the flavor of the marked heterogeneity in using assessment tools and have deliberately avoided suggestions that one scale is better than another. They have focused on the most commonly used scales. Building an international consensus in this area will ensure an improvement in the quality of care, rehabilitation, and health care systems’ efficiency. In addition, using the same outcome measures at the international level can help to have comparable data and identify evidence-based best practices

Introduction on Measuring Spinal Cord Injury

For measuring spinal cord injury (SCI), different outcome measures are available. These can be categorized into clinician-reported, patient-reported, observer-reported, or performance-based outcome measures. Regardless of their category, outcome measures should link within the International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health framework. Many efforts serve to highlight peculiarities of people living with SCI according to “Body Function and Structures, Activity and Participation, and Personal and Environmental Factors.” International researchers already provided different core set for SCI people in the early post-acute phase for a long-term context. Differences are described. Internationally, researchers and clinicians are going to promote evidence-based recommendations for measuring SCI. Specific projects for rehabilitation and other specifics for the SCI population are presented

Measuring Assistive Devices Management in Spinal Cord Injury

This chapter aims to describe and evaluate the assessment tools for evaluating assistive devices management in people with SCI through a systematic review of scientific literature. The systematic review was conducted in line with COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) on Pubmed, Scopus, CINAHL, and Web of Science. After removing duplicates, 3333 papers were screened. Of these, 476 were included in this systematic review. Among these, 37 papers were considered for this chapter. Results show 22 assessment tools that evaluate the assistive devices management area in persons with SCI. Among these, most scales evaluate the aspect of self-efficacy, mobility, and skill, and they are mainly performance tests. The most common assessment tools identified include the Wheelchair Circuit to assess manual wheelchair mobility; the Wheelchair Skills Test (WST) offering 33 skills spanning the spectrum from skills as easy as applying the brakes to skills as difficult as performing a wheelie; and the Wheelchair use Confidence Scale (WheelCon), a measurement scale that assesses self-efficacy with conceptual use of a manual wheelchair to measure physical environment, knowledge, and problem-solving, and advocacy

Psychological Evaluation in Spinal Cord Injury

This chapter aims to describe and evaluate the assessment tools to evaluate psychological aspects in people with SCI through a systematic review of scientific literature. The systematic review was conducted in line with COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) on Pubmed, Scopus, Cinahl, and Web of Science. After removing duplicates, 3333 papers were screened, and of these, 476 were included in this systematic review. Among these, 64 papers were considered for this chapter. Results show 46 assessment tools that evaluate the psychological area of persons with SCI. Among these, most scales evaluate the aspect of anxiety and depression, self-efficacy, and coping strategies. The most common assessment tools are the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), which is a self-report measure that asks subjects how often they have been bothered by the problems such as feeling depressed, feeling tired, poor appetite, feelings of guilt, or thoughts of suicide; the Spinal Cord Lesion Related Coping Strategies Questionnaire (SCL-CSQ), which is a specific scale developed to evaluate the coping strategies of persons with SCI; and, the Spinal Cord Injury–Falls Concern Scale (SCI-FCS), which is a scale that assesses the degree of attention, with respect to falls in a wheelchair, by people with SCI while they carry out daily activities

Development of the pregnancy and motherhood evaluation questionnaire (PMEQ) for evaluating and measuring the impact of physical disability on pregnancy and the management of motherhood. A pilot study

ABSTRACT Purpose: The aim of this study was to develop a questionnaire that allows researchers to investigate and measure the impact of physical disability on pregnancy and the management of motherhood. Such a questionnaire requires good internal consistency. Methods: The tool was developed following a study conducted in 2013 in the United States consisting of a semi-structured interview with open-ended questions. A team of three experts drafted and refined the questions, generating 31 retrospective, self-rated, and predefined questions (answered using a 5-point Likert scale). A statistical analysis of the instrument was also included, to assess its reliability and internal consistency. Results: The Pregnancy and Motherhood Evaluation Questionnaire (PMEQ) was prepared. It is a selfadministered questionnaire consisting of an initial section and three subscales. In this phase of the study, 35 women with different pathologies leading to physical disability were recruited and completed the questionnaire. The PMEQ was found to have a good internal consistency. Cronbach’s a was 0.812 (p &gt; 0.05). Conclusion: The PMEQ has proven to be a valid, reliable, and rapid administrative tool useful for investigating and measuring the impact of physical disability on the management of pregnancy and motherhood. IMPLICATION FOR REHABILITATION - This study provides researchers and clinicians a new tool for the evaluation of motherhood and pregnancy in women with physical disabilities. - The PMEQ has proven to be a valid, reliable, and rapid administrative tool (10 min) useful for investigating and measuring the impact of physical disability on the management of pregnancy and motherhood. - It is a new tool useful in both clinical and research practice to underline the importance of carrying out preventive and woman-centered assistance interventions. - This tool is useful for promoting the autonomous management of pregnancy and motherhood in women with physical disabilities, and improving these women’s quality of life and sense of satisfaction and competence in managing maternal tasks

The validity of rasterstereography as a technological tool for the objectification of postural assessment in the clinical and educational fields: pilot study

The present study aimed to validate Formetric 4D with wheelchair users in a sitting position, comparing the results with the data obtained from a postural assessment. Nine individuals with spinal cord injury were evaluated through postural assessment. Each individual was subjected to rasterstereography in a sitting position using the Formetric 4D. Test-retest reliability was evaluated, after four hours: at first, the detection was performed on the same participant three times by three different rater. After four hours, the detection was repeated by the first operator. This study highlighted the ability of Formetric 4D to provide consistent results at different times and with different evaluators, reporting a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.74 and excellent intra- and inter-operator stability with an ICC of 0.91 to 0.96. Compared to the postural evaluation, the degree of accuracy of the measurements acquired with Formetric 4D, analyzed through Spearman’s rho, showed statistically significant positive correlations with anthropometric measurements. The present study provides information enabling the use of the Formetric 4D tool in clinical, research, and educational settings this will be a very useful tool that allows students to have a three-dimensional representation of the anatomical components involved in the sitting position, helping them to learn and gain an in-depth understanding of how to perform an objective postural assessment examination