The LEFS is a self-report questionnaire. Patients answer the question “Today, do you or would you have any difficulty at all with:” in regards to twenty different. No difficulty: with usual work, housework or school activities; with usual hobbies, recreational or sporting activities; getting into or out of the bath; walking. Another questionnaire, the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS), with a version translated and validated for the Portuguese (LEFS-Brazil), has excellent.
|Published (Last):||9 June 2005|
|PDF File Size:||13.91 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||6.24 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The ratings were performed allowing discussion of the patient profile, and a single agreed-on score was determined. The corrected item-item total correlation is an estimate of the degree to which a single item score correlates with the total scale score with that item removed.
Lffs the absence of an accepted measure of function, determination of the validity of functional scales has relied heavily on the concept of construct validity.
The MCID is approximately 9 scale points. We conceived the LEFS as a measure applicable for people with a broad lefz of lower-extremity problems.
To date, the responsiveness of several of the SF subscales and the physical component summary score have been shown to be superior or equivalent to condition-specific scales relevant to the lower extremity.
Normative data for the lower extremity functional scale (LEFS).
Sensitivity to change was examined using a prognosis rating. The average of the 5 clinician estimates for MCID was 10 scale points, suggesting that the statistical approach has resulted in a reasonable estimate of the MCID. The Functional Status Index: Participants who were unfit for work had worse scores.
None of the patients in our study scored at 0 or 80 on the scale at admission or at the 3-week follow-up assessment, indicating that there is no ceiling or floor effect associated with the LEFS in this type of patient population.
The second approach was a survey of 5 clinicians who reported that they had used the LEFS for an minimum of 4 months and on at least 10 patients as a clinical decision-making tool.
Making sharp turns while running fast. Clinicians can be reasonably confident that a change of greater than 9 scale points is not only auestionnaire true change but is also a clinically meaningful functional change. Our sample included only 3 patients with hip and thigh conditions. Methods – Healthy visitors and staff at 4 hospitals were requested to participate.
Normative data for the lower extremity functional scale (LEFS).
Accordingly, it was necessary that the first study compare the LEFS with a measure of established validity. The LEFS is efficient to administer and score and is applicable for research purposes and clinical decision making for individual patients.
An external standard of change was introduced to examine the extent to which a health status measure lefw differentiates among patients who have improved, deteriorated, or remained stable and subsequently used in our study and by other authors. Measurement properties of the RM In the case of a ceiling effect, there is restricted range for improvement because patients questiohnaire at the high level of function on the scale.
The cutpoint of change on the Qestionnaire that maximized the area under a receiver operating characteristic ROC curve was determined as the estimate of the amount of change on the LEFS that best classified patients who had changed an important amount from those who had not. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne. Within Kirshner and Guyatt’s taxonomy, responsiveness exists independent of validity. Questiknnaire articles in Google Scholar. The use of a generic, patient-based health assessment SF for evaluation of patients with anterior cruciate ligament injuries.
Data were collected over a 4-month period. There were no statistically significant correlations between socioeconomic status and type of employment on the one hand and LEFS score on the other. In our study, we also used a rating of expected change as the theory for change. The LEFS was developed in a group of patients with various musculoskeletal disorders, and no reference data for the healthy population are available.
We surveyed existing questionnaires. There was a higher correlation between the prognostic rating of change and the LEFS than between the prognostic rating of change and the SF physical function score. Any of your usual work, housework, or school activities. The SF, however, is time-consuming to administer and score in the clinic and was not designed for individual patient decision making.
Responsiveness of functional status in low back pain: If the patient’s condition is deemed to be relatively chronic and is expected to change slowly, the clinician might select a 2-week time frame for a change in score of just at the MDC and MCID of 9 scale points.
In the case of a floor effect, there is a restricted range for deterioration in functional status. Furthermore, the influence of sex, age, type of employment, socioeconomic status, and history of lower extremity surgery on the LEFS were investigated. A history of lower extremity surgery was associated with a lower LEFS score. The selected subjects were informed about the objectives of the study and signed a Consent form, agreeing in participating in the study. SF physical component summary scores a.
Generic health status measures assess overall health, including social, emotional, and physical health status, and are intended to be applicable across a broad spectrum of diseases, interventions, and demographic and cultural subgroups. Ceiling and floor effects exist for a health status measure when patients often score at the extremes of normal function or severely restricted function.
However, LEFS may represent a promising alternative compared to the WOMAC, because it has good internal consistency and is able to discriminate issues such as pain and function as supported by the findings by Pua et al.
The American College of Rheumatology criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis of the hip. In the first approach, we used the prognostic ratings of change to separate patients into those who were predicted to undergo important change prognostic ratings of 2, 3, and 4 and those who were predicted to undergo no important change at 3 weeks prognostic ratings of 0 and 2.
The minimum possible score is 0 points, indicating very low function. Here we provide normative data for the LEFS. Two estimates of the SEM were obtained.
Free online Lower Extremity Function Scale (LEFS) calculator
Spearman correlation coefficients between the rating of change and the physical function change scores obtained for the 3-week interval varied from. The SF has been used to assess outcomes in people with hip, knee, and ankle dysfunction.
In light of this finding as well as the greater ease of administering and scoring the LEFS, this scale appears to be a good choice for documenting lower-extremity function.