Demonstration of the test-retest reliability and sensitivity of the Lower Limb Functional Index-10 as a measure of functional recovery post burn injury: A cross-sectional repeated measures study design
Burns and Trauma, ISSN: 2321-3876, Vol: 4, Issue: 1, Page: 16
2016
- 4Citations
- 26Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Background: Lower limb burns can significantly delay recovery of function. Measuring lower limb functional outcomes is challenging in the unique burn patient population and necessitates the use of reliable and valid tools. The aims of this study were to examine the test-retest reliability, sensitivity, and internal consistency of Sections 1 and 3 of the Lower Limb Functional Index-10 (LLFI-10) questionnaire for measuring functional ability in patients with lower limb burns over time. Methods: Twenty-nine adult patients who had sustained a lower limb burn injury in the previous 12 months completed the test-retest procedure of the study. In addition, the minimal detectable change (MDC) was calculated for Section 1 and 3 of the LLFI-10. Section 1 is focused on the activity limitations experienced by patients with a lower limb disorder whereas Section 3 involves patients indicating their current percentage of pre-injury duties. Results: Section 1 of the LLFI-10 demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) 0.98, 95 % CI 0.96-0.99) whilst Section 3 demonstrated high test-retest reliability (ICC 0.88, 95 % CI 0.79-0.94). MDC scores for Sections 1 and 3 were 1.27 points and 30.22 %, respectively. Internal consistency was demonstrated with a significant negative association (rs =-0.83) between Sections 1 and 3 of the LLFI-10 (p < 0.001). Conclusions: This study demonstrates that Section 1 and 3 of the LLFI-10 are reliable for measuring functional ability in patients who have sustained lower limb burns in the previous 12 months, and furthermore, Section 1 is sensitive to changes in patient function over time.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85016250969&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41038-016-0043-y; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27574686; https://academic.oup.com/burnstrauma/article/doi/10.1186/s41038-016-0043-y/5671088; https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41038-016-0043-y; https://research-repository.uwa.edu.au/en/publications/e375f9ff-ad7f-4b9d-8d5b-92c51c369e36; https://research-repository.uwa.edu.au/en/publications/demonstration-of-the-test-retest-reliability-and-sensitivity-of-t; http://research-repository.uwa.edu.au/en/publications/demonstration-of-the-testretest-reliability-and-sensitivity-of-the-lower-limb-functional-index10-as-a-measure-of-functional-recovery-post-burn-injury(e375f9ff-ad7f-4b9d-8d5b-92c51c369e36).html; http://research-repository.uwa.edu.au/en/publications/demonstration-of-the-testretest-reliability-and-sensitivity-of-the-lower-limb-functional-index10-as-a-measure-of-functional-recovery-post-burn-injury-a-crosssectional-repeated-measures-study-design(e375f9ff-ad7f-4b9d-8d5b-92c51c369e36).html; https://research-repository.uwa.edu.au/en/publications/demonstration-of-the-testretest-reliability-and-sensitivity-of-the-lower-limb-functional-index10-as-a-measure-of-functional-recovery-post-burn-injury(e375f9ff-ad7f-4b9d-8d5b-92c51c369e36).html; http://burnstrauma.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41038-016-0043-y; https://burnstrauma.biomedcentral.com/counter/pdf/10.1186/s41038-016-0043-y; https://burnstrauma.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41038-016-0043-y
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know