It is well recognised that organised trauma systems reduce trauma patient mortality. As established systems mature, there is an increasing need to better understand the patient recovery trajectory. Mobility and physical function are key aspects of recovery, but the optimal instruments for measurement in the acute hospital setting remain unclear.
Methods
A systematic review was undertaken to identify and describe mobility and physical function instruments scored by direct patient assessment, in adult trauma patients in an acute hospital setting. Databases were searched with no date restrictions. Instruments that were specific to subgroups or related to individual conditions, diseases or joints were excluded. The consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments checklist was used to assess risk of bias where relevant. Clinimetric properties were reported where possible, including reliability, validity and responsiveness.
Results
Fourteen thousand one hundred and fourteen articles were identified with 37 eligible for final review, including six instruments. None had been specifically designed for use in a heterogeneous range of trauma patients. The Functional Independence Measure was the most commonly cited (n = 10 studies), with evidence of construct validity, responsiveness and minimal floor/ceiling effects (<3%). The Acute Care Index of Function (n = 1 study) was found to be valid and responsive whilst the modified Iowa Level of Assistance (n = 2 studies) was reliable and responsive, but ceiling effects ranged from 26% to 37%. Little clinimetric data were available for other measures.
Conclusion
Evidence from a few studies show promise for the use of the Functional Independence Measure, Acute Care Index of Function and modified Iowa Level of Assistance to measure mobility and physical function in trauma patients, however comprehensive clinimetric data are lacking. Future research should test these scores in specifically designed clinimetric property studies in defined trauma patient populations. This would enable the identification of a gold standard measure for evaluating treatment effectiveness, enabling benchmarking between centres, allow prediction of recovery pathways and optimise trauma patient outcomes.
NathensABJurkovichGJRivaraFP, et al.Effectiveness of state trauma systems in reducing injury-related mortality: A national evaluation. J Trauma2000; 48: 25–30. discussion 30–31.
2.
CameronPAGabbeBJCooperDJ, et al.A statewide system of trauma care in Victoria: Effect on patient survival. Med J Aust2008; 189: 546–550.
3.
World Health Organization. Injuries and violence: The facts, Geneva: World Health Organization, 2010.
4.
GabbeBJCameronPA. Importance of functional and quality of life outcomes in trauma. Surgeon2013; 11: 114–114.
5.
JacksonJCObremskeyWBauerR, et al.Long-term cognitive, emotional, and functional outcomes in trauma intensive care unit survivors without intracranial hemorrhage. J Trauma2007; 62: 80–88.
SleatGKArdolinoAMWillettKM. Outcome measures in major trauma care: A review of current international trauma registry practice. Emerg Med J2011; 28: 1008–1012.
8.
AitkenSAJenkinsPJRymaszewskiL. Revisiting the ‘bag of bones': Functional outcome after the conservative management of a fracture of the distal humerus. Bone Joint J2015; 97-B: 1132–1138.
9.
WilliamsGPSchacheAGMorrisME. Mobility after traumatic brain injury: Relationships with ankle joint power generation and motor skill level. J Head Trauma Rehabil2013; 28: 371–378.
10.
BinkleyJMStratfordPWLottSA, et al.The Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS): Scale development, measurement properties, and clinical application. North American Orthopaedic Rehabilitation Research Network. Phys Ther1999; 79: 371–383.
11.
DitunnoJFScivolettoGPatrickM, et al.Validation of the walking index for spinal cord injury in a US and European clinical population. Spinal Cord2008; 46: 181–188.
12.
FleischhackerETrentzschHKuppingerD, et al.Long-term changes of patient-reported quality of life after major trauma: The importance of the time elapsed after injury. Injury2018; 49: 195–202.
13.
GabbeBJSimpsonPMCameronPA, et al.Long-term health status and trajectories of seriously injured patients: A population-based longitudinal study. PLoS Med2017; 14: e1002322–e1002322.
14.
Turner-StokesLSiegertRJ. A comprehensive psychometric evaluation of the UK FIM + FAM. Disabil Rehabil2013; 35: 1885–1895.
15.
LawJFieldingBJacksonD, et al.The UK FIM+FAM Extended Activities of Daily Living module: Evaluation of scoring accuracy and reliability. Disabil Rehabil2009; 31: 825–830.
16.
SandhaugMAndelicNVatneA, et al.Functional level during sub-acute rehabilitation after traumatic brain injury: Course and predictors of outcome. Brain Injury2010; 24: 740–747.
17.
World Health Organization. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Geneva: World Health Organization.
18.
BergeronELavoieABelcaidA, et al.Should patients with isolated hip fractures be included in trauma registries?J Trauma2005; 58: 793–797.
19.
TerweeCBMokkinkLBKnolDL, et al.Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: A scoring system for the COSMIN checklist. Qual Life Res2012; 21: 651–657.
20.
MokkinkLBTerweeCBKnolDL, et al.The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: A clarification of its content. BMC Med Res Methodol2010; 10: 22–22.
21.
TerweeCBBotSDde BoerMR, et al.Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol2007; 60: 34–42.
22.
MoherDLiberatiATetzlaffJ, et al.Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA statement. J Clin Epidemiol2009; 62: 1006–1012.
23.
EmhoffTAMcCarthyMCushmanM, et al.Functional scoring of multi-trauma patients: Who ends up where?J Trauma1991; 31: 1227–1232.
24.
HetheringtonHEarlamRJKirkCJ. The disability status of injured patients measured by the functional independence measure (FIM) and their use of rehabilitation services. Injury1995; 26: 97–101.
25.
GabbeBJSimpsonPMSutherlandAM, et al.Functional measures at discharge: Are they useful predictors of longer term outcomes for trauma registries?Ann Surg2008; 247: 854–859.
26.
WilliamsonODGabbeBJSutherlandAM, et al.Comparing the responsiveness of functional outcome assessment measures for trauma registries. J Trauma2011; 71: 63–68.
27.
HerridgeMSChuLMMatteA, et al.The RECOVER Program: Disability risk groups and 1-year outcome after 7 or more days of mechanical ventilation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med2016; 194: 831–844.
28.
BartoloMBargellesiSCastioniCA, et al.Mobilization in early rehabilitation in intensive care unit patients with severe acquired brain injury: An observational study. J Rehabil Med2017; 49: 715–722.
29.
BartoloMBargellesiSCastioniCA, et al.Early rehabilitation for severe acquired brain injury in intensive care unit: Multicenter observational study. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med2016; 52: 90–100.
30.
AkmalMTrivediRSutcliffeJ. Functional outcome in trauma patients with spinal injury. Spine2003; 28: 180–185.
31.
LeBlancJDe GuiseEGosselinN, et al.Comparison of functional outcome following acute care in young, middle-aged and elderly patients with traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury2006; 20: 779–790.
32.
DagherJHHabraNLamoureuxJ, et al.Global outcome in acute phase of treatment following moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury from motor vehicle collisions vs assaults. Brain Injury2010; 24: 1389–1398.
33.
DagherJHRichard-DenisALamoureuxJ, et al.Acute global outcome in patients with mild uncomplicated and complicated traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury2013; 27: 189–199.
34.
WuJFauxSGEstellJ, et al.Early rehabilitation after hospital admission for road trauma using an in-reach multidisciplinary team: A randomised controlled trial. Clin Rehabil2017; 31: 1189–1200.
35.
KazisLEAndersonJJMeenanRF. Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Med Care1989; 27: S178–S189.
36.
CohenJ. A power primer. Psychol Bull1992; 112: 155–159.
37.
GennarelliTAChampionHRCopesWS, et al.Comparison of mortality, morbidity, and severity of 59,713 head injured patients with 114,447 patients with extracranial injuries. J Trauma1994; 37: 962–968.
38.
DemetriadesDMartinMSalimA, et al.The effect of trauma center designation and trauma volume on outcome in specific severe injuries. Ann Surg2005; 242: 512–517. discussion 7–9.
39.
HaiderAHChangDCHautER, et al.Mechanism of injury predicts patient mortality and impairment after blunt trauma. J Surg Res2009; 153: 138–142.
40.
GlanceLGDickAOslerTM, et al.Judging trauma center quality: Does it depend on the choice of outcomes?J Trauma2004; 56: 165–172.
41.
GabbeBJCameronPAHannafordAP, et al.Routine follow up of major trauma patients from trauma registries: What are the outcomes?J Trauma2006; 61: 1393–1399.
42.
GabbeBJSutherlandAMWolfeR, et al.Can the modified functional independence measure be reliably obtained from the patient medical record by different raters?J Trauma2007; 63: 1374–1379.
43.
SusmanMDiRussoSMSullivanT, et al.Traumatic brain injury in the elderly: Increased mortality and worse functional outcome at discharge despite lower injury severity…including discussion. J Trauma2002; 53: 219–224.
44.
GrossmanMScaffDWMillerD, et al.Functional outcomes in octogenarian trauma…includes discussion. J Trauma2003; 55: 26–32.
45.
WagnerAKFabioTZafonteRD, et al.Physical medicine and rehabilitation consultation: Relationships with acute functional outcome, length of stay, and discharge planning after traumatic brain injury. Am J Phys Med Rehabil2003; 82: 526–536.
46.
DhungelVLiaoJRautH, et al.Obesity delays functional recovery in trauma patients. J Surg Res2015; 193: 415–420.
47.
SchallerSJAnsteyMBlobnerM, et al.Early, goal-directed mobilisation in the surgical intensive care unit: A randomised controlled trial. Lancet2016; 388: 1377–1388.
48.
ParkerMMGhazinouriRMichaudY, et al.Measuring functional status in the acute treatment phase following trauma. J Acute Care Phys Ther2013; 4: 13–19.
49.
RoachKEVan DillenLR. Development of an Acute Care Index of functional status for patients with neurologic impairment. Phys Ther1988; 68(7): 1102–1108.
50.
BissettBGreenMMarzanoV, et al.Reliability and utility of the Acute Care Index of Function in intensive care patients: An observational study. Heart Lung2016; 45: 10–14.
51.
Van DillenLRRoachKE. Reliability and validity of the Acute Care Index of function for patients with neurologic impairment. Phys Ther1988; 68(7): 1098–1101.
52.
RoachKEAllyDFinnertyB, et al.The relationship between duration of physical therapy services in the acute care setting and change in functional status in patients with lower-extremity orthopedic problems. Phys Ther1998; 78: 19–24.
53.
Garzon-SerranoJRyanCWaakK, et al.Early mobilization in critically ill patients: Patients’ mobilization level depends on health care provider's profession. PM R2011; 3: 307–313.
54.
KasotakisGSchmidtUPerryD, et al.The surgical intensive care unit optimal mobility score predicts mortality and length of stay. Crit Care Med2012; 40: 1122–1128.
55.
PivaSDoraGMinelliC, et al.The Surgical Optimal Mobility Score predicts mortality and length of stay in an Italian population of medical, surgical, and neurologic intensive care unit patients. J Crit Care2015; 30: 1251–1257.
56.
SchallerSJStaubleCGSuemasaM, et al.The German Validation Study of the Surgical Intensive Care Unit Optimal Mobility Score. J Crit Care2016; 32: 201–206.
57.
CornerEJWoodHEnglebretsenC, et al.The Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment Tool (CPAx): Validation of an innovative new tool to measure physical morbidity in the general adult critical care population; an observational proof-of-concept pilot study. Physiotherapy2013; 99: 33–41.
58.
CornerEJSoniNHandyJM, et al.Construct validity of the Chelsea critical care physical assessment tool: An observational study of recovery from critical illness. Crit Care2014; 18: R55–R55.
59.
ShieldsRKEnloeLJEvansRE, et al.Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of functional tests in patients with total joint replacement. Phys Ther1995; 75: 169–176. discussion 76–79.
60.
OldmeadowLBEdwardsERKimmelLA, et al.No rest for the wounded: Early ambulation after hip surgery accelerates recovery. ANZ J Surg2006; 76: 607–611.
61.
CalthorpeSBarberEAHollandAE, et al.An intensive physiotherapy program improves mobility for trauma patients. J Trauma Acute Care Surg2014; 76: 101–106.
62.
KimmelLAElliottJESayerJM, et al.Assessing the reliability and validity of a physical therapy functional measurement tool–The modified Iowa Level of Assistance Scale–in acute hospital inpatients. Phys Ther2016; 96: 176–182.
StratfordPWGoldsmithCH. Use of the standard error as a reliability index of interest: An applied example using elbow flexor strength data. Phys Ther1997; 77: 745–750.
65.
HustedJACookRJFarewellVT, et al.Methods for assessing responsiveness: A critical review and recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol2000; 53: 459–468.
66.
PodsiadloDRichardsonS. The timed “Up & Go”: A test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons. J Am Geriatr Soc1991; 39: 142–148.
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.
