Article

OBJECTIVE: To compare the responsiveness of 2 major systems developed for
rehabilitation settings--the FIM and the interRAI Post Acute Care (PAC)
assessment--in older patients. DESIGN: Trained raters assessed patients with both
tools at admission and discharge. SETTING: Musculoskeletal (MSK) and geriatric
rehabilitation units (GRUs) in 2 rehabilitation hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Older
adults receiving rehabilitation (N=208; mean age +/- SD, 78.5+/-9.3; 67% women).
INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Responsiveness was
evaluated using effect size (ES) and standardized response mean (SRM). RESULTS:
ES and SRM were somewhat higher for the FIM motor (GRU ES=1.68, SRM=1.31; MSK
ES=2.12, SRM=2.25) than the PAC (GRU ES=1.64, SRM=1.29; MSK ES=1.57, SRM=1.89) in
both patient groups. Both tools were more responsive in MSKs than GRUs. This may
reflect the greater frailty and clinical complexity of GRU patients. CONCLUSIONS:
Both the FIM motor and the PAC were able to detect clinically relevant
improvement in functional ability in older rehabilitation inpatients.
CI - Copyright 2010 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by
Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Langue : ANGLAIS