PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 7745102

Measuring pediatric physical function.

N L Young·J G Wright
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Most pediatric orthopaedic interventions are intended to improve or preserve physical function, yet their outcomes have been assessed using primarily surrogate measures (e.g., radiographic indices) that may not accurately represent patients' function. Physical function may be more appropriately measured with activity-based scales, but these have been infrequently applied in surgical studies. The purpose of this study was to identify existing activity-based physical-function scales appropriate for pediatric orthopaedics, to present criteria useful for scale selection, and to discuss the special problems of measuring physical function in children. Twenty-one scales relevant to pediatric orthopaedics are described according to their target population, purpose, method of administration, content, and quality of standardization. These scales have been further classified according to a new taxonomy. The unique aspects of measuring physical function in children are discussed and include the effect of age and development, method of reporting, and question formats. Standardized measures of physical function based on physical-activity ability exist and should be used more frequently to assess pediatric orthopaedic interventions.

Explore related subjects

Activities of Daily LivingChildChild, PreschoolGuidelines as TopicHumansOrthopedicsOutcome Assessment, Health CarePediatricsJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

N L Young, J G Wright. Measuring pediatric physical function.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7745102/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed1999

Effects of stroke on medical resource use and costs in acute myocardial infarction. GUSTO I Investigators. Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries Study.

BACKGROUND: Stroke occurs concurrently with myocardial infarction (MI) in approximately 30 000 US patients each year. This number is expected to rise with the increasing use of thrombolytic therapy for MI. However, no data exist for the economic effect of stroke in the setting of acute MI (AMI). The purpose of this prospective study was to assess the effect of stroke on medical resource use and costs in AMI patients in the United States. METHODS AND RESULTS: Medical resource use and cost data were prospectively collected for 2566 randomly selected US GUSTO I patients (from 23 105 patients) and for the 321 US GUSTO I patients who developed non-bypass surgery-related stroke during the baseline hospitalization. Follow-up was for 1 year. All costs are expressed in 1993 US dollars. During the baseline hospitalization, stroke was associated with a reduction in cardiac procedure rates and an increase in length of stay, despite a hospital mortality rate of 37%. Together with stroke-related procedural costs of $2220 per patient, the baseline medical costs increased by 44% ($29 242 versus $20 301, P<0.0001). Follow-up medical costs were substantially higher for stroke survivors ($22 400 versus $5282, P<0.0001), dominated by the cost of institutional care. The main determinant for institutional care was discharge disability status. The cumulative 1-year medical costs for stroke patients were $15 092 higher than for no-stroke patients. Hemorrhagic stroke patients had a much higher hospital mortality rate than non-hemorrhagic stroke patients (53% versus 15%, P<0.001), which was associated with approximately $7200 lower mean baseline hospitalization cost. At discharge, hemorrhagic stroke patients were more likely to be disabled (68% versus 46%, P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: In this first large prospective economic study of stroke in AMI patients, we found that strokes were associated with a 60% ($15 092) increase in cumulative 1-year medical costs. Baseline hospitalization costs were 44% higher because of longer mean lengths of stay. Stroke type was a key determinant of baseline cost. Follow-up costs were more than quadrupled for stroke survivors because of the need for institutional care. Disability level was the main determinant of institutional care and thus of follow-up costs.

Activities of Daily Living↗
PubMed1999

Is there a rationale for rationing chronic dialysis? A hospital based cohort study of factors affecting survival and morbidity.

OBJECTIVES: To determine factors influencing survival and need for hospitalisation in patients needing dialysis, and to define the potential basis for rationing access to renal replacement therapy. DESIGN: Hospital based cohort study of all patients starting dialysis over a 4 year recruitment period (follow up 15-63 months). Groups were defined on the basis of age, comorbidity, functional status, and whether dialysis initiation was planned or unplanned. SETTING: Renal unit in a district general hospital, which acts as the main renal referral centre for four other such hospitals and serves a population of about 1.15 million people. SUBJECTS: 292 patients, mean age 61.3 years (18-92 years, SD 15.8), of whom 193 (66%) were male, and 59 (20%) were patients with diabetes. Dialysis initiation was planned in 163 (56%) patients and unplanned in 129 (44%). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall survival, 1 year survival, and hospitalisation rate. RESULTS: Factors affecting survival in the Cox's proportional hazard model were Karnofsky performance score at presentation (hazard ratio 0.979, 95% confidence interval 0.972 to 0. 986), comorbidity severity score (1.240, 1.131 to 1.340), age (1.036, 1.018 to 1.054), and myeloma (2.15, 1.140 to 4.042). The Karnofsky performance score used 3 months before presentation was significant (0.970, 0.956 to 0.981), as was unplanned presentation in this model (1.796, 1.233 to 2.617). Using these factors, a high risk group of 26 patients was defined, with 19.2% 1 year survival. Denying dialysis to this group would save 3.2% of the total cost of the chronic programme but would sacrifice five long term survivors. Less rigorous definition of the high risk group would save more money but lose more long term survivors. CONCLUSIONS: Severity of comorbid conditions and functional capacity are more important than age in predicting survival and morbidity of patients on dialysis. Late referral for dialysis affects survival adversely. Denial of dialysis to patients in an extremely high risk group, defined by a new stratification based on logistic regression, would be of debatable benefit.

Activities of Daily Living↗