HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: ptj.20060197v1 87/7/899    most recent Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Rapid Responses are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Allen, D. D Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Allen, D. D

Validity and Reliability of the Movement Ability Measure: A Self-Report Instrument Proposed for Assessing Movement Across Diagnoses and Ability Levels

DD Allen, PT, PhD, is Adjunct Associate Professor, Department of Physical Therapy, Samuel Merritt College, Oakland, Calif, and Post-Doctoral Fellow, Health and Disability Research Institute, Boston University, Boston, Mass

Address all correspondence to Dr Allen at: allendianed{at}gmail.com

Background and Purpose: Physical therapists lack instruments that assess movement across diagnoses and ability levels while focusing on physical therapy–specific outcomes. This article describes the creation of a Movement Ability Measure (MAM) and initial evidence of validity and reliability.

Subjects: More than 300 adult volunteers with various movement levels completed the 24-item questionnaire.

Methods: Item response theory methods were used to create the MAM and gather evidence of content and construct validity, test-retest and other types of reliability, and concurrent validity with the California Functional Evaluation instrument and self-acknowledgement of movement problems.

Results: The intraclass correlation coefficient for test-retest reliability was .92. Person separation reliability was .98. Correlation (r) with the California Functional Evaluation instrument was .76. Respondents who denied having movement problems perceived a significantly higher level of movement ability than those who claimed to have a little, some, or a lot of movement problems in the preceding week.

Discussion and Conclusion: The MAM shows promise for documenting perceived movement ability across ability levels and diagnoses.