Article
The reliability of the functional independence measure: A quantitative review☆,☆☆

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-9993(96)90184-7Get rights and content

Abstract

Objective: The reliability of the Functional Independence Measure (FIMSM) for adults was examined using procedures of meta-analysis.

Data Sources: Eleven published studies reporting estimates of reliability for the FIM were located using computer searches of Index Medicus, Psychological Abstracts, the Functional Assessment Information Service, and citation tracking.

Study Selection: Studies were identified and coded based on type of reliability (interrater, test-retest, or equivalence), method of data analysis, size of sample, and training or experience of raters.

Data Extraction: Information from the articles was coded by two independent raters. Interrater reliability for coding all elements included in the analysis ranged from .89 to 1.00.

Data Synthesis: The 11 investigations included a total of 1,568 patients and produced 221 reliability coefficients. The majority of the reliability values (81%) were from interrater reliability studies, and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was the most commonly used statistical procedure to compute reliability. The reported reliability values were converted to a common correlation metric and aggregated across the 11 studies. The results revealed a median interrater reliability for the total FIM of .95 and median test-retest and equivalence reliability values of .95 and .92, respectively. The median reliability values for the six FIM subscales ranged from .95 for Self-Care to .78 for Social Cognition. For the individual FIM items, median reliability values varied from .90 for Toilet Transfer to .61 for Comprehension. Median and mean reliability coefficients for FIM motor items were generally higher than for items in the cognitive or communication subscales.

Conclusions: Based on the 11 studies examined in this review the FIM demonstrated acceptable reliability across a wide variety of settings, raters, and patients.

References (37)

  • DM Jaworski et al.

    The Functional Independence Measure: a pilot study comparison of observed and reported ratings

    Rehabil Nurs Res

    (1994)
  • BB Hamilton et al.

    Interrater reliability of the 7-level Functional Independence Measure (FIM)

    Scand J Rehabil Med

    (1994)
  • ME Segal et al.

    Inter-institutional agreement of individual Functional Independence Measure (FIM) items at two sites on one sample of SCI patients

    Paraplegia

    (1993)
  • BB Hamilton et al.

    Interrater agreement of the seven level Functional Independence Measure (FIM) [abstra

    Arch Phys Med Rehabil

    (1991)
  • L Brosseau

    The inter-rater reliability and construct validity of the Functional Independence Measure for multiple sclerosis subjects

    Clin Rehabil

    (1994)
  • GV Glass et al.

    Meta-analysis in social research

    (1981)
  • HM Cooper

    Integrating research: a guide for literature reviews

    (1989)
  • DB Petitti

    Meta-analysis, decision analysis, and cost effectiveness analysis: methods for quantitative synthesis in medicine

    (1994)

    • Cited by (0)

    ☆

    Supported in part by Rehabilitation Research and Training Center grant H133B30041 from the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, US Department of Education.

    ☆☆

    The authors have chosen not to select a disclosure statement.

    View full text
    Copyright © 1996 Published by Elsevier Inc.