Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Background:

The purpose of this study was to determine the reliability and validity of scores from the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) Activities of Daily Living (ADL) and Sports scales in patients who have a variety of ankle injuries.

Methods:

All patients who underwent surgical treatment for an ankle injury and completed the FAAM ADL and Sport scales were included in this study (n = 456; 192 females, 264 males). The average age was 47.6 years (range, 18-79 years). The average time to follow-up was 3.8 years (range, 2.0-7.7 years). All data were collected prospectively and reviewed retrospectively. A reliability and validity analysis, utilizing the Rasch measurement model, a special case of item response theory (IRT), was conducted.

Results:

Reliability was very good. For FAAM ADL, person reliability was 0.87 and item reliability was 0.99. For FAAM Sport, person reliability was 0.89 and item reliability was 1.0. Infit mean square (MNSQ) values, which assess internal scale validity, were examined. For FAAM ADL, items 11 (coming up on your toes) and 10 (squatting) were high (2.27 and 2.08, respectively). All other infit values were within the acceptable range of 0.5 to 1.7. For FAAM Sport, all infit values were within the acceptable range. Outfit MNSQ values, which assess the FAAM ADL and Sport rating scale function, were examined. Three items from FAAM ADL were beyond the acceptable range. Items 10 and 11 from FAAM ADL had high outfit MNSQ values (2.15 and 1.98, respectively). Item 19 (light to moderate work) item had a marginally low outfit MNSQ of 0.48. For FAAM Sport, all outfit values were within the acceptable range.

Conclusion:

There was very good evidence of the reliability and validity of FAAM ADL and FAAM Sport scores. Two FAAM ADL items may indicate the need for further scale development for use in a diverse surgical ankle population.

Level of Evidence:

Level III, comparative series.

Keywords

ankle Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM)SF-12 Rasch reliability validity

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abrams

JS.

Patients reporting outcomes: are we getting it right?

J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017;99(5):e24.

Andrich

A rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika. 1978;43(4):561-573.

Anselmi

Vidotto

Bettinardi

Bertolotti

Measurement of change in health status with Rasch models. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2015;13:1-7.

Boone

WJ.

Rasch analysis for instrument development: why, when, and how?

CBE Life Sci Educ. 2016;15(4):1-7.

Budiman-Mak

Conrad

Stuck

Matters

Theoretical model and Rasch analysis to develop a revised Foot Function Index. Foot Ankle Int. 2006;27(7):519-527.

Carcia

Martin

Drouin

JM.

Validity of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure in athletes with chronic ankle instability. J Athl Train. 2008;43(2):179-183.

DeVellis

RF.

Classical test theory. Med Care. 2006;44(11):S50-S59.

Farrugia

Goldstein

Petrisor

BA.

Measuring foot and ankle injury outcomes: common scales and checklists. Injury. 2011;42(3):276-280.

Fisher

Jr.

Physical disability construct convergence across instruments: towards a universal metric. J Outcome Meas. 1997:1(2):87-113.

10.

Gustafson

JE.

Testing and obtaining fit of data to the Rasch model. Br J Math Stat Psychol. 1980;33(2):220.

11.

Hamilton

Maly

Giffin

, et al. Validation of the Questionnaire to Identify Knee Symptoms (QuIKS) using Rasch analysis. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2015;13(157):1-11.

12.

Hoch

Legner

Lorete

Hoch

MC.

The validity of the Quick-FAAM in patients seeking treatment for an acute or subacute foot or ankle health condition. J Sport Rehabil. 2017;26(3).

13.

Keenan

Redmond

Horton

Conaghan

Tennant

The Foot Posture Index: Rasch analysis of a novel, foot-specific outcome measure. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;88(1):88-93.

14.

Linacre

. Facets Rasch measurement computer program. Version 3.66.0. Chicago, IL: Winsteps; 2009.

15.

Linacre

JM.

What do infit and outfit, mean-square and standardized mean?

Rasch Meas Trans. 2002;16(2):878.

16.

Martin

Irrgang

JJ.

A survey of self-reported outcome instruments for the foot and ankle. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2007;37(2):72-84.

17.

Martin

Irrgang

Burdett

Conti

Van Swearingen

. Evidence of validity for the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM). Foot Ankle Int. 2005;26(11):968-983.

18.

Martin-Löf

The notion of redundancy and its use as a quantitative measure of the discrepancy between a statistical hypothesis and observational data. Scand J Stat. 1974;1(1);3.

19.

Messick

Validity. In: Linn

R. L.

, ed. Educational Measur-ement. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Macmillan; 1989:13-104.

20.

Reliability and separation of measures. https://www.winsteps.com/winman/reliability.htm Accessed August 19, 2019.

21.

Sierevelt

Schats

RZW

Terwee

DHCB

. Measurement properties of the most commonly used foot- and ankle-specific questionnaires: the FFI, FAOS and FAAM. A systematic review. Knee Surg Sport Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018;26(7):2059-2073.

22.

Smith

Jr.

Evidence for the reliability of measures and validity of measure interpretation: a Rasch measurement perspective. J Appl Meas. 2001;2(3):281-311.

23.

Tennant

McKenna

Hagell

Application of Rasch analysis in the development and application of quality of life instruments. Value Health. 2004;7(Suppl 1):S22-S26.

24.

Ware

Jr Kosinski

Keller

SD.

A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996;34(3):220-233.

25.

Wright

Linacre

Gustafson

Martin-Lof

Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Meas Trans. 1994;8(3):370.

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.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB

0.01 MB

0.04 MB

0.15 MB

Rasch Analysis of Reliability and Validity of Scores From the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM)

Abstract

Background:

Methods:

Results:

Conclusion:

Level of Evidence:

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material