This article describes the development of the Tufts Assessment of Motor Performance (TAMP). The TAMP measures fine and gross motor performance status across multiple classifications of functional skills. A Raschmodel item response theory analysis supported the hypothesis that the eight motor domains within the TAMP have a hierarchical structure consistent with clinical expectation. Furthermore, total scores summed across the domains were clinically meaningful and statistically defensible. An example of how the TAMP may be employed in clinical assessment is provided. Advantages of the use of the Rasch model are discussed in reference to issues of instrument construction and the clinical description of motor performance.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Andrich, D.
(1978). A rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika, 43, 561-573.
2.
Andrich, D.
(1988). Rasch models for measurement. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
3.
Brink, N. E.
(1972). Rasch's logistic model vs. the Guttman model. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 32, 921-927.
4.
Bruninks, R. H.
, Woodcock, R. W., Weatherman, R. F., & Hill, B. K. (1984). Scales of Independent Behavior (SIB). Allen, TX: DLM Teaching Resources.
5.
Courington, S. M.
, Lambert, R. W., Becker, S. W., Ludlow, L. H., & Wright, B. D. (1983). The measurement of attitudes toward blindness and its importance for rehabilitation. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research, 6, 67-72.
6.
Feinstein, A.
(1986). Scientific and clinical problems in indexes of functional disability. Annals of Internal Medicine, 105, 413-420.
7.
Gans, B. M.
, Haley, S. M., Hallenborg, S. C., Mann, N., Inacio, C. A., & Fass, R. M. (1988). Description and interobserver reliability of the Tufts Assessment of Motor Performance. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 66, 202-210.
8.
Grosse, M. E.
, & Wright, B. D. (1986). Setting, evaluating, and maintaining certification standards with the Rasch model. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 9, 267-285.
9.
Haley, S. M.
, & Ludlow, L. H. (in press a). Applicability of the hierarchical scales of the Tufts Assessment of Motor Performance for schoolaged children and adults with disabilities. Physical Therapy.
10.
Haley, S. M.
, & Ludlow, L. H. (in press b). Pediatric evaluation of disability inventory: Development of normative and scaled scores using Rasch rating scale analysis. International Journal of Educational Research.
11.
Haley, S. M.
, Ludlow, L. H., Gans, B. M., Fass, R. M., & Inacio, C. A. (1991). Tufts Assessment of Motor Performance: An empirical approach towards identifying motor performance categories. Archives of Physical and Medical Rehabilitation, 72, 359-366.
12.
Howard, E. P.
(1985). Applying the Rasch model to test administration. Nursing Education, 24, 340-343.
13.
Jette, A.
(1985). State of the art in functional status assessment. In J. M. Rothstein (Ed.), Measurement in physical therapy (pp. 137-168). New York: Churchill Livingston.
14.
Julian, E. R.
, & Wright, B. D. (1988). Using computerized patient simulations to measure the clinical competence of physicians. Applied Measurement in Education, 1, 299-318.
15.
Kalinowski, A. G.
(1985). Measuring clinical pain. Journal ofPsycho-pathology and Behavioral Assessment, 7, 329-349.
16.
Klein, R.
, & Bell, B. (1982). Self-care skills: Behavior measurement with Klein-Bell ADL Scale. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 63, 335-338.
17.
Ludlow, L. H.
(1986). Graphical analysis of item response theory residuals. Applied Psychological Measurement, 10, 217-229.
18.
Ludlow, L. H.
, & Hillocks, G. (1985). Psychometric considerations in the analysis of reading skill hierarchies. Journal of Experimental Education, 54, 15-21.
19.
Meenan, R. F.
, Gertman, P. M., & Mason, J. H. (1980). Measuring health status in arthritis: The Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales. Arthritis & Rheumatism, 23, 146-152.
20.
Merbitz, C.
, Morris, J., & Grip, J. C. (1989). Ordinal scale and foundations of misinference. Archives of Physical Medicine Rehabilitation, 70, 308-312.
21.
Rasch, G.
(1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen: Danmarks Paedgogiske Institut. (Reprinted with Foreword and Afterword by B. D. Wright, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980)
22.
Riddick, L. N.
(1989). Quantitative assessments: Their mathematical faults. WFOTBulletin, 20, 11-13.
23.
Rosow, I.
, & Brelau, N. (1966). A Guttman Scale for the aged. Journal of Gerontology, 21, 556-559.
24.
Schulz, E. M.
, Lambert, R. W., Becker, S. W., Wright, B. D., & Courington, S. M. (1985). An instrument to measure the activity capacity of the blind. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research, 8, 415-424.
25.
Sheikh, K.
(1986). Disability scales: Assessment of reliability. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 67, 245-249.
26.
Silverstein, B.
, Kilgore, K., & Fisher, W. (1989). Implementing patient tracking systems and using functional assessment scales. Wheaton, IL: Marianjoy Rehabilitation Center.
27.
Sparrow, S.
, Balla, D., & Cicchetti, D. (1984). Survey form manual, Vineland Behavior Scales (interview edition). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Services.
28.
Spector, W. D.
, Katz, S., Murphy, J. B., & Fulton, J. P. (1987). The hierarchical relationship between activities of daily living and instrumental activities of daily living. Journal of Chronic Disability, 40, 481-489.
29.
Stewart, A. L.
, Ware, J. E., & Brook, R. H. (1981). Advances in the measurement of functional status: Construction of aggregate indexes. Medical Care, 19, 473-488.
30.
Wright, B. D.
, & Linacre, J. M. (1989). Observations are always ordinal; measurements, however, must be interval. Archives of Physical Medicine Rehabilitation, 70, 857-860.
31.
Wright, B. D.
, & Masters, G. N. (1982). Rating scale analysis. Chicago: MESA Press.
