Objective: To assess the value of providing Functional Assessment Measure (FIM + FAM) data as part of the hospital discharge information after brain injury rehabilitation.
Design: Postal survey of general practitioners (GPs) and consultants. Subjects: Consecutive discharges (n = 117) from an early brain injury rehabilitation unit over one year.
Results: Response rates were 81% from GPs and 54% from consultants. Eighty-four (89%) of GPs and 57 (82%) of consultants rated the information as useful; 87 (92%) and 51 (84%) respectively described the accompanying notes as easy to understand.
Conclusions: The incorporation of FIM + FAM data in discharge summaries is worthwhile but the utility of this practice is still to be established.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
McGregor K, Pentland B. Head injury rehabilitation in the UK: an economic perspective. Soc Sci Med1997; 45: 295–303.
2.
Granger CV, Hamilton BB, Keith RA. Advances in functional assessment for medical rehabilitation. Top Geriatr Med1986; 1: 59–74.
3.
Hall KM. Overview of functional assessment scales in brain injury rehabilitation. Neuro Rehabilitation1992; 2: 98–113.
4.
Frattali CM. Perspectives on functional assessment: its use for policy making. Disabil Rehabil1993; 15: 1–9.
5.
Pentland B, McPherson K. An attempt to measure the effectiveness of early brain injury rehabilitation. Health Bull1994; 52: 438–445.
6.
McPherson KM, Pentland B, Cudmore SF, Prescott RJ. An inter-rater reliability study of the Functional Assessment Measure (FIM+FAM). Disabil Rehabil1996; 18: 341–347.
7.
McPherson KM, Pentland B. Disability in patients following traumatic brain injury – which measure?Int J Rehabil Res1997; 20: 1–10.
8.
Sibbald B, Addington-Hall J, Brenneman D, Freeling P. Telephone versus postal surveys of general practitioners: methodological considerations. Br J Gen Pract1994; 44: 297–300.
9.
Choyce MQ, Maitra AK. Satisfaction with the accident and emergency department – a postal survey of general practitioners' views. J Accident Emerg Med1996; 13: 280–282.
10.
Stoddart PA, Brennan L, Hatch DJ, Bingham R. Postal survey of paediatric practice and training among consultant anaesthetists in the UK. Br J Anaesth1994; 73: 559–563.
11.
Granger CV, Divan N, Fiedler RC. Functional assessment scales: a study of persons after traumatic brain injury. Am J Phys Med Rehabil1995; 74: 107–113.
12.
Heinemann AW, Linacre JM, Wright BD, Hamilton BB, Granger CV. Relationships between impairment and physical disability as measured by the Functional Independence Measure. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1993; 74: 566–573.
13.
Pentland B. Policies, attitudes and results in early rehabilitation of patients with severe head injuries. In: von Wild K ed. Spektrum der Neurorehabilitation. Munich: Zuckschwerdt Verlag, 1993: 147–152.
14.
Wikander B, Ekelund P, Milsom I. An evaluation of multidisciplinary intervention governed by Functional Independence Measure (FIM) in incontinent stroke patients. Scand J Rehabil Med1998; 30: 15–20.
