We scaled a measure of physical functioning to a population-based normative sample by extending self-reported basic and instrumental activities of daily living with items from the Medical Outcomes Study 12-Item Short Form Survey. We used item response theory to place items administered to a sample of older elective surgery patients on a common metric linked to the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) normative sample using published data. The summary measure for physical functioning was internally consistent (Cronbach’s α = .83), reliable across a broad range of functioning, and was moderately correlated with walking speed (r = .52) and energy expenditure (r = .40). Demonstrating predictive criterion validity, less impaired scores were associated with lower risk of discharge to a rehabilitation facility (odds ratio = .38, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.22, 0.66]) and shorter hospital stays (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.87, 95% CI [0.79, 0.97]). Our approach may facilitate direct comparison of physical functioning measures across existing and future studies using a common, population-based metric, when overlapping items with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) PROMIS item bank are present.
AsbergK. H.SonnU. (1989). The cumulative structure of personal and instrumental ADL. A study of elderly people in a health service district. Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 21, 171–177.
2.
BakerF. B. (1962). Empirical determination of sampling distributions of item discrimination indices and a reliability coefficient. Final Report. U.S.O.E., Contract OE-2-10-071.
3.
BjornerJ. B.KreinerS.WareJ. E.DamsgaardM. T.BechP. (1998). Differential item functioning in the Danish translation of the SF-36. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51, 1189–1202.
4.
BollenK. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: Wiley-Interscience.
CellaD.RileyW.StoneA.RothrockN.ReeveB.YountS.…ChoiS. (2010). The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005–2008. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63, 1179–1194.
7.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
8.
ColeS. R.KawachiI.MallerS. J.BerkmanL. F. (2000). Test of item-response bias in the CES-D scale. Experience from the New Haven EPESE Study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 53, 285–289.
9.
ComreyA. L.LeeH. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
10.
FieoR.ManlyJ. J.SchupfN.SternY. (2013). Functional status in the young–old: Establishing a working prototype of extended-instrumental activities of daily living scale. Journal of Gerontology: Medical Sciences, 69, 766–772.
11.
FieoR. A.AustinE. J.StarrJ. M.DearyI. J. (2011). Calibrating ADL-IADL scales to improve measurement accuracy and to extend the disability construct into the preclinical range: A systematic review. BMC Geriatrics, 11, 42.
12.
FisherW. P.JrEubanksR. L.MarierR. L. (1997). Equating the MOS SF36 and the LSU HSI Physical Functioning Scales. Journal of Outcome Measurement, 1, 329–362.
13.
GrangerC. V.HamiltonB. B.LinacreJ. M.HeinemannA. W.WrightB. D. (1993). Performance profiles of the functional independence measure. American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation, 72, 84–89.
14.
HaleyS. M.McHorneyC. A.WareJ. E.Jr (1994). Evaluation of the MOS SF-36 physical functioning scale (PF-10): I. Unidimensionality and reproducibility of the Rasch item scale. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 47, 671–684.
15.
HambletonR. K.SwaminathanH.RogersH. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
16.
HanmanB. (1958). The evaluation of physical ability. The New England Journal of Medicine, 258, 986–993.
17.
HaysR. D.LiuH.SpritzerK.CellaD. (2007). Item response theory analyses of physical functioning items in the medical outcomes study. Medical Care, 45, S32–S38.
18.
HeinemannA. W.LinacreJ. M.WrightB. D.HamiltonB. B.GrangerC. (1993). Relationships between impairment and physical disability as measured by the functional independence measure. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 74, 566–573.
19.
HornJ. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30, 179–185.
20.
JenkinsonC.FitzpatrickR.GarrattA.PetoV.Stewart-BrownS. (2001). Can item response theory reduce patient burden when measuring health status in neurological disorders? Results from Rasch analysis of the SF-36 physical functioning scale (PF-10). Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 71, 220–224.
21.
JonesR. N.FondaS. J. (2004). Use of an IRT-based latent variable model to link different forms of the CES-D from the Health and Retirement Study. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 39, 828–835.
22.
KatzS.FordA. B.MoskowitzR. W.JacksonB. A.JaffeM. W. (1963). Studies of illness in the aged: The index of ADL: A standardized measure of biological and psychosocial function. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 185, 914–919.
23.
KempenG. I.SuurmeijerT. P. (1990). The development of a hierarchical polychotomous ADL-IADL scale for noninstitutionalized elders. The Gerontologist, 30, 497–502.
24.
LaPlanteM. P. (2010). The classic measure of disability in activities of daily living is biased by age but an expanded IADL/ADL measure is not. The Journals of Gerontology. Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 65, 720–732.
25.
LawtonM. P.BrodyE. M. (1969). Assessment of older people: Self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. The Gerontologist, 9, 179–186.
26.
LinacreJ. M.HeinemannA. W.WrightB. D.GrangerC. V.HamiltonB. B. (1994). The structure and stability of the Functional Independence Measure. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 75, 127–132.
27.
LiuH.CellaD.GershonR.ShenJ.MoralesL. S.RileyW.HaysR.D. (2009). Representativeness of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Internet panel. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63, 1169–1178.
28.
LordF. M. (1953). The relation of test score to the trait underlying the test. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 13, 517–549.
29.
MahoneyF.WoodO.BarthelD. W. (1958). Rehabilitation of chronically ill patients: The influence of complications on the final goal. Southern Medical Journal, 51, 605–609.
30.
MartinM.KosinskiM.BjornerJ. B.WareJ. E.JrMacleanR.LiT. (2007). Item response theory methods can improve the measurement of physical function by combining the modified health assessment questionnaire and the SF-36 physical function scale. Quality of Life Research, 16, 647–660.
31.
McHorneyC. A. (2002). Use of item response theory to link 3 modules of functional status items from the Asset and Health Dynamics Among the Oldest Old Study. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 83, 383–394.
32.
McHorneyC. A.HaleyS. M.WareJ. E.Jr (1997). Evaluation of the MOS SF-36 Physical Functioning Scale (PF-10): II. Comparison of relative precision using Likert and Rasch scoring methods. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 50, 451–461.
33.
MoskowitzE.McCannC. B. (1957). Classification of disability in the chronically ill and aging. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 5, 342–346.
34.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (1998–2011). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author.
35.
NagiS. (1976). An epidemiology of disability among adults in the United States. The Milbank Quarterly, 54, 439–467.
36.
NunnallyJ. C. (1967). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
37.
PazS. H.SpritzerK. L.MoralesL. S.HaysR. D. (2013). Evaluation of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Information System (PROMIS®) Spanish-language physical functioning items. Quality of Life Research, 22, 1819–1830.
38.
PereiraM. A.FitzGeraldS. J.GreggE. W.JoswiakM. L.RyanW. J.SuminskiR. R.…ZmudaJ. M. (1997). A collection of Physical Activity Questionnaires for health-related research. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 29, S1–S205.
39.
RaczekA. E.WareJ. E.BjornerJ. B.GandekB.HaleyS. M.AaronsonN. K.…SullivanM. (1998). Comparison of Rasch and summated rating scales constructed from SF-36 physical functioning items in seven countries: Results from the IQOLA Project. International Quality of Life Assessment. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51, 1203–1214.
40.
RoseM.BjornerJ. B.BeckerJ.FriesJ. F.WareJ. E. (2008). Evaluation of a preliminary physical function item bank supported the expected advantages of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 61, 17–33.
41.
RoseM.BjornerJ. B.GandekB.BruceB.FriesJ. F.WareJ. E.Jr (2014). The PROMIS Physical Function item bank was calibrated to a standardized metric and shown to improve measurement efficiency. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 67, 516–526.
42.
SpectorW. D.FleishmanJ. A. (1998). Combining activities of daily living with instrumental activities of daily living to measure functional disability. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 53, S46–S57.
43.
SpectorW. D.KatzS.MurphyJ. B.FultonJ. P. (1987). The hierarchical relationship between activities of daily living and instrumental activities of daily living. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 40, 481–489.
44.
StewartA. L.KambergC. J. (1992). Physical functioning measures. In StewartA. L.WareJ. E., Jr. (Eds.), Measuring Functioning and Well-Being (pp. 86–101). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
45.
StoneR.MurtaughC. (1990). The elderly population with chronic functional disability: Implications for home care eligibility. The Gerontologist, 30, 491–496.
46.
TakaneY.de LeeuwJ. (1987). On the relationship between item response theory and factor analysis of discretized variables. Psychometrika, 52, 393–408.
47.
TengE. L.ChuiH. C. (1987). The Modified Mini-Mental State (3MS) examination. The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 48, 314–318.
48.
ThissenD.SteinbergL.WainerH. (1988). Use of item response theory in the study of group differences in trace lines. In: WainerH.BraunH. (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 147–169). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
49.
TonnerM. C.HarringtonC. (2003). Nursing facility and home and community based service need criteria in the United States. Home Health Care Services Quarterly, 24, 65–83.
50.
TsujiT.SonodaS.DomenK.SaitohE.LiuM.ChinoN. (1995). ADL structure for stroke patients in Japan based on the functional independence measure. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, 74, 432–438.
51.
VerbruggeL. M.JetteA. M. (1994). The disablement process. Social Science & Medicine, 38, 1–14.
52.
WangW.-C. (2004). Effects of anchor item methods on the detection of differential item functioning within the family of Rasch models. Journal of Experimental Education, 72, 221–261.
53.
WolfeF.MichaudK.PincusT. (2004). Development and validation of the health assessment questionnaire II: A revised version of the health assessment questionnaire. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 50, 3296–3305.
54.
ZwickR. (2012). A review of ETS differential item functioning assessment procedures: Flagging rules, minimum sample size requirements, and criterion refinement. Retrieved July 25, 2014, fromhttp://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/RR-12-08.pdf
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
