Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2009 Nov 29:9:52.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2318-9-52.

Comparing the functional independence measure and the interRAI/MDS for use in the functional assessment of older adults: a review of the literature

Christine Glenny  1 , Paul Stolee
Affiliations
Review

Comparing the functional independence measure and the interRAI/MDS for use in the functional assessment of older adults: a review of the literature

Christine Glenny et al. BMC Geriatr. .

Abstract

Background: The rehabilitation of older persons is often complicated by increased frailty and medical complexity - these in turn present challenges for the development of health information systems. Objective investigation and comparison of the effectiveness of geriatric rehabilitation services requires information systems that are comprehensive, reliable, valid, and sensitive to clinically relevant changes in older persons. The Functional Independence Measure is widely used in rehabilitation settings - in Canada this is used as the central component of the National Rehabilitation Reporting System of the Canadian Institute of Health Information. An alternative system has been developed by the interRAI consortium. We conducted a literature review to compare the development and measurement properties of these two systems.

Methods: English language literature published between 1983 (initial development of the FIM) and 2008 was searched using Medline and CINAHL databases, and the reference lists of retrieved articles. Relevant articles were summarized and charted using the criteria proposed by Streiner. Additionally, attention was paid to the ability of the two systems to address issues particularly relevant to older rehabilitation clients, such as medical complexity, comorbidity, and responsiveness to small but clinically meaningful improvements.

Results: In total, 66 articles were found that met the inclusion criteria. The majority of FIM articles studied inpatient rehabilitation settings; while the majority of interRAI/MDS articles focused on nursing home settings. There is evidence supporting the reliability of both instruments. There were few articles that investigated the construct validity of the interRAI/MDS.

Conclusion: Additional psychometric research is needed on both the FIM and MDS, especially with regard to their use in different settings and with different client groups.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Results of search strategy.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. McKnight C, Powell C. Outcome measures in the rehabilitation of older adults. Reviews in Clinical Gerontology. 2001;11(1):83–94.
    1. Landi F, Bernabei R, Russo A, Zuccala G, Onder G, Carosella L, Cesari M, Cocchi A. Predictors of rehabilitation outcomes in frail patients treated in a geriatrichospital. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2002;50:679–684. doi: 10.1046/j.1532-5415.2002.50162.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Katz S, Stroud MW. Functional assessment in geriatrics: A review of progress and directions. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 1989;37:267–271. - PubMed
    1. Gosselin S, Desrosiers J, Crriveau H, Herbert R, Rochette A, Provencher V, Cote S, Tousignant M. Outcomes during and after impatient rehabilitation: Comparison between adults and older adults. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine. 2008;40(1):55–60. doi: 10.2340/16501977-0144. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ergeletzis D, Kevorkian CG, Rintala D. Rehabilitation of the older stroke patient. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation. 2002;81(12):881–889. doi: 10.1097/00002060-200212000-00001. - DOI - PubMed