Article
Measuring functional limitations in rising and sitting down: Development of a questionnaire

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-9993(96)90005-2Get rights and content

Abstract

Objective: Develop and test a self-administered questionnaire that measures perceived and actual functional limitations in rising and sitting down.

Setting: Private practices for physical therapy and outpatient clinics of hospitals and rehabilitation centers.

Patients: 345 outpatients (43$ male, aged 14 to 92 years) with different grades of functional limitations and different types of lower extremity orthopedic or rheumatologic disorders.

Methods: The Questionnaire Rising and Sitting Down (QR&S) was developed on the basis of a literature review and careful operationalization of functional limitations. Five dimensions concerning different objects (high chair, low chair, toilet, bed, and car) and one global dimension were postulated to be contained in the instrument. Mokken scale analysis was used to test the postulated dimensions (scalability coefficient H). Furthermore, robustness with respect to patient characteristics was determined, as well as intratest reliability (reliability coefficient Rho), test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]), content validity (coverage of operationalized aspects), and construct validity (testing of seven hypotheses).

Results: Mokken scale analysis confirmed the existence of 5 object dimensions (H = .53–.59). However, two global dimensions were found (H = .50–.54). The resulting hierarchical scales, consisting of subsets of the 32 final QR&S items are robust and measure functional limitations in a reliable (Rho .77–.91; ICC .72–.90) and valid (3 out of 4 aspects covered, 2 hypotheses rejected for 3 out of 7 scales) manner.

Conclusion: The QR&S is a reliable and valid self-administered questionnaire. It consists of hierarchical scales and measures perceived and actual functional limitations in rising and sitting down.

References (28)

  • E Budiman-Mak et al.

    The Foot Function Index: a measure of foot pain and disability

    J Clin Epidemiol

    (1991)
  • M Jefferys et al.

    A set of tests for measuring motor impairment in prevalence studies

    J Chronic Dis

    (1969)
  • B Kirshner et al.

    A methodological framework for assessing health indices

    J Chron Dis

    (1985)
  • D Podsiadlo et al.

    The timed “Up & Go”: a test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons

    J Am Geriatr Soc

    (1991)
  • JS Munton et al.

    An investigation into the problems of easy chairs used by the arthritic and the elderly

    Rheumatol Rehabil

    (1981)
  • Netherlands Central Bureau of Statistics

    Physical disability in the population of the Netherlands 1986/1988

    (1990)
  • P Lee et al.

    Evaluation of a functional index in rheumatoid arthritis

    Scand J Rheumatol

    (1973)
  • JF Fries et al.

    Measurement of patient outcome in arthritis

    Arthritis Rheum

    (1980)
  • RF Meenan et al.

    Measuring health status in arthritis

  • RF Meenan et al.

    AIMS2. The content and properties of a revised and expanded Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales Health Status Questionnaire

    Arthritis Rheum

    (1992)
  • P Aichroth et al.

    A knee function assessment chart

  • N Bellamy et al.

    Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee

    J Rheumatol

    (1988)
  • NA Johanson et al.

    A self-administered hip-rating questionnaire for the assessment of outcome after total hip replacement

    J Bone Joint Surg Am

    (1992)
  • RH Jebsen et al.

    Measurement of time in a standardized test of patient mobility

    Arch Phys Med Rehabil

    (1970)
  • Cited by (51)

    • Patient-Reported Mobility: A Systematic Review

      2016, Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
    • Biomechanical risk factors for knee osteoarthritis when using passive and powered ankle-foot prostheses

      2014, Clinical Biomechanics
      Citation Excerpt :

      Five strides from each limb were selected for analysis. Subjects also completed a Prosthetics Evaluation Questionnaire (PEQ) (Roorda et al., 1996) for each prosthetic condition and sections relating to ambulation ability were analyzed. Marker data were initially tracked in Cortex (Motion Analysis, Santa Rosa, CA, USA) and marker and analog data were exported to Visual3D (C-Motion, Inc., Germantown, MD, USA) for analysis.

    • Construct validity and test-retest reliability of the climbing stairs questionnaire in lower-limb amputees

      2010, Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
      Citation Excerpt :

      We used literature addressing the relation between general mobility limitations and sociodemographic factors in lower-limb amputees after rehabilitation. We hypothesized that limitations in climbing stairs according to the Climbing Stairs Questionnaire would be greater in lower-limb amputees who (1) are older,22-24 (2) have a vascular cause of amputation than in lower-limb amputees with a nonvascular cause of amputation,22,25 (3) have a bilateral amputation than in lower-limb amputees with a unilateral amputation,22,26 (4) have a higher level of amputation (transfemoral or knee disarticulation) than in lower-limb amputees with a lower level of amputation (transtibial or Syme amputation),22,23 (5) have more comorbid conditions according to the FCI,24,25 (6) had rehabilitation treatment in a nursing home than in lower-limb amputees who had this treatment in an outpatient department of a rehabilitation center,26 (7) climb fewer flights of stairs according to their rating of the number of flights climbed, (8) have more limitations in locomotor capabilities according to the LCI,23 (9) have more limitations in rising and sitting down according to the Questionnaire Rising and Sitting down,15,16 and (10) have more limitations in walking according to the Walking Questionnaire.17 Hypotheses addressing relations (hypotheses 1, 5, 8, 9, and 10) were quantified by using the Spearman correlation coefficient, and hypotheses addressing the presence or absence of differences were quantified by using the Mann-Whitney U test (hypotheses 2, 3, 4, and 6) or Kruskal-Wallis test (hypothesis 7; 2-tailed P<.05).

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Supported in part by a grant from the St. Jorisstichting.

    No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit upon the authors or upon any organization with which the authors are associated.

    View full text