Citation

Tate RL, Pfaff A, Veerabangsa A, Hodgkinson AE. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2004; 85(4): 538-545.

Affiliation

Rehabilitation Studies Unit, Department of Medicine, University of Sydney and Royal Rehabilitation Centre Sydney, Ryde, Australia. rtate@med.usyd.edu.au

Copyright

(Copyright © 2004, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

15083428

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the psychometric properties of an alternative form of the Sydney Psychosocial Reintegration Scale (SPRS) that focuses on competency of functioning (Form B) as opposed to the original form that examines change from the premorbid level (Form A). DESIGN: Descriptive correlational study. Ratings were made by 2 treating clinicians on patients at discharge and 1 week later by using Forms A and B of the SPRS. A subset of 25 close relatives of the patients also completed the 2 SPRS forms and the London Handicap Scale at patient discharge. SETTING: Inpatient brain injury rehabilitation unit. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-six people with brain injury. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. Main outcome measure The SPRS is a 12-item questionnaire, rated on a 7-point scale, that measures function in occupational, interpersonal, and living skills domains. RESULTS: The internal consistency of Form B was high (alpha=.90), as was stability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]=.90) and interrater agreement (ICC=.84). Similarly, good psychometric properties were found for Form A for internal consistency (alpha=.90), stability (ICC=.90) and interrater agreement (ICC=.82), which replicated previous findings with this form. Comparability between forms was excellent (ICC=.97), and correspondence between ratings of the clinician and close relatives on Forms A and B was fair to good (ICC=.57, ICC=.67, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Form B of the SPRS has psychometric properties equally sound to those of Form A. It is anticipated that there will be many advantages in having alternative forms of the same instrument, thus enabling measurement of psychosocial integration from different perspectives.

Language: en