Skip to main content

Construct Validity of the Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility (PLUS-M) in Adults With Lower Limb Amputation.

Citation
Hafner, B. J., et al. “Construct Validity Of The Prosthetic Limb Users Survey Of Mobility (Plus-M) In Adults With Lower Limb Amputation.”. Archives Of Physical Medicine And Rehabilitation, pp. 277-285.
Center University of Washington
Author Brian J Hafner, Ignacio A Gaunaurd, Sara J Morgan, Dagmar Amtmann, Rana Salem, Robert S Gailey
Keywords amputation, Artificial limbs, Motor activity, Movement, Outcome assessment (health care), rehabilitation, self report
Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess construct validity of the Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility (PLUS-M), a self-report mobility measure for people with lower limb amputation (LLA).

DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.

SETTING: Private prosthetic clinics (n=37).

PARTICIPANTS: Current lower limb prosthesis users (N=199; mean age ± SD, 55.4±14.3y; 71.4% men) were assessed before receiving a replacement prosthesis, prosthetic socket, and/or prosthetic knee.

INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Convergent construct validity was examined using correlations between participants' PLUS-M T-scores and measures of physical function, mobility, and balance, including the Amputee Mobility Predictor (AMP), timed Up and Go (TUG), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Physical Function (PROMIS-PF), Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire-Mobility Subscale (PEQ-MS), and Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale. Known-groups construct validity was evaluated by comparing differences in PLUS-M T-scores among participants grouped by Medicare Functional Classification Level (MFCL).

RESULTS: PLUS-M T-scores demonstrated a moderate positive relationship with AMP scores (ρ=.54, P<.001) and a moderate negative relationship with TUG times (ρ=-.56, P<.001). The PLUS-M also showed a strong positive relationship with PEQ-MS scores (ρ=.78, P<.001), ABC Scale scores (ρ=.81, P<.001), and PROMIS-PF T-scores (ρ=.81, P<.001). Significant differences (P<.05) in PLUS-M T-scores were found among groups of people classified by different MFCLs.

CONCLUSIONS: Study results support the validity of the PLUS-M as a self-report measure of prosthetic mobility. Correlations between PLUS-M and measures of physical function, mobility, and balance indicate convergent construct validity. Similarly, significant differences in PLUS-M T-scores across MFCL groups provide evidence of known-groups construct validity. In summary, evidence indicates that PLUS-M has good construct validity among people with LLA.

Year of Publication
2017
Journal
Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation
Volume
98
Issue
2
Number of Pages
277-285
Date Published
12/2017
ISSN Number
1532-821X
DOI
10.1016/j.apmr.2016.07.026
Alternate Journal
Arch Phys Med Rehabil
PMID
27590443
PMCID
PMC5276724
Download citation