Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Head-to-head Rasch comparison of the Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire-Mobility Section and the Prosthetic Mobility Questionnaire 2.0 in Italian lower-limb prosthesis users.
Franchignoni, Franco; Giordano, Andrea; Monticone, Marco.
Afiliación
  • Franchignoni F; Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine Unit, Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri IRCCS, Tradate, VA, Italy.
  • Giordano A; Bioengineering Unit, Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri IRCCS, Veruno, NO, Italy.
  • Monticone M; Department Medical Sciences and Public Health, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy.
Prosthet Orthot Int ; 47(3): 300-306, 2023 Jun 01.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36037293
BACKGROUND: The Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire-Mobility Section (PEQ-MS) and the Prosthetic Mobility Questionnaire (PMQ 2.0) are two validated self-report questionnaires assessing mobility in people with lower-limb amputation. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess and compare the psychometric properties of PEQ-MS and PMQ 2.0 in a sample of 100 Italian lower-limb prosthesis users. METHODS: We conducted a secondary Rasch analysis of data from a prospective single-group observational study, comparing the PEQ-MS and PMQ 2.0 head to head and then cocalibrating them onto a common interval-scaled metric, through common-person equating, to compare their operational range. RESULTS: The PMQ 2.0 showed good measurement qualities. The PEQ-MS had acceptable psychometric properties, despite some weakness in item selection. Cocalibration of the two questionnaires indicated that they assess the same underlying construct (prosthetic mobility), but PMQ 2.0 items have a wider range of difficulty (by one logit). Finally, we created a nomogram allowing to "cross-walk" between scores of the two questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS: Comparison of the two questionnaires showed that the PMQ 2.0 has a better measurement performance and larger operational range than the PEQ-MS, making it more suitable for assessing lower-limb prosthesis users with a large range of locomotor abilities, in particular those with higher mobility levels.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Miembros Artificiales Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies Límite: Humans País/Región como asunto: Europa Idioma: En Revista: Prosthet Orthot Int Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Italia

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Miembros Artificiales Tipo de estudio: Observational_studies Límite: Humans País/Región como asunto: Europa Idioma: En Revista: Prosthet Orthot Int Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Italia