Abstract Reprint: Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory

Comparing Psychometrics in Cerebrovascular Accident to Traumatic Brain Injury

© 2012 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine


James F. Malec, PhD, ABPP-Cn, Rp, Jacob Kean, PhD, Irwin M. Altman, PhD, MBA, Shannon Swick, MA


ABSTRACT. Malec JF, Kean J, Altman IM, Swick S. Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory: comparing psychometrics in cerebrovascular accident to traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2012;93:2271-5.

Objectives: (1) To evaluate the measurement reliability and construct validity of the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory, 4th revision (MPAI-4) in a sample consisting exclusively of patients with cerebrovascular accident (CVA) using single parameter (Rasch) item-response methods; (2) to examine the differential item functioning (DIF) by sex within the CVA population; and (3) to examine DIF and differential test functioning (DTF) across traumatic brain injury (TBI) and CVA samples.

Design: Retrospective psychometric analysis of rating scale data.

Setting: Home- and community-based brain injury rehabilitation program.

Participants: Individuals post-CVA (n861) and individuals with TBI (n603).

Interventions: Not applicable.

Main Outcome Measure: MPAI-4.

Results: Item data on admission to community-based rehabilitation were submitted to Rasch, DIF, and DTF analyses. The final calibration in the CVA sample revealed satisfactory reliability/separation for persons (.91/3.16) and items (1.00/ 23.64). DIF showed that items for pain, anger, audition, and memory were associated with higher levels of disability for CVA than TBI patients; whereas, self-care, mobility, and use of hands indicated greater overall disability for TBI patients. DTF analyses showed a high degree of association between the 2 sets of items (R.92; R2.85) and, at most, a 3.7 point difference in raw scores.

Conclusions: The MPAI-4 demonstrates satisfactory psychometric properties for use with individuals with CVA applying for interdisciplinary posthospital rehabilitation. DIF reveals clinically meaningful differences between CVA and TBI groups that should be considered in results at the item and subscale level.

Key Words: Outcome assessment (health care); Rehabilitation; Stroke.

© 2012 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine