Total amount: € 0,00
Official Journal of the , , , ,
In association with
Indexed/Abstracted in: CINAHL, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 2,063
Online ISSN 1973-9095
Rodà F. 1, 2, Agosti M. 1, Corradini E. 1, Lombardi F. 3, Maini M. 4, Brianti R. 1
1 University Hospital of Parma, Department of Geriatric and Rehabilitation, Complex Medical Rehabilitation Unit, Parma, Italy;
2 University of Parma, Department of Neuroscience, Parma, Italy;
3 San Sebastiano Hospital of Correggio, Intensive Rehabilitation Unit, Correggio, Reggio Emilia, Italy;
4 Casa di Cura San Giacomo, Ponte dell’Olio, Piacenza, Italy
BACKGROUND: In Italy, the lack of appropriate use of intensive rehabilitative services is an acknowledged issue, as demonstrated by periodic epidemiological surveys. Rehabilitation activities are planned without considering the clinical complexity, known to be one of the most fundamental factors able to outline the real patients’ needs on recently clinical practice rehabilitation guidelines. Alternative diagnostic systems become, therefore, necessary. For this reason, we would like to propose the Rehabilitation Complexity Scale - Extended version (RCS-E) within intensive rehabilitation units in Emilia Romagna.
AIM: This study aims at submitting an Italian translation, cross-cultural adaptation and preliminary reliability evaluation of the Rehabilitation Complexity Scale Extended (13th Version) (RCS-E).
DESIGN: Face validity and test-retest reliability.
SETTING: The study was conducted in three different rehabilitation units of the Emilia Romagna region, Northern Italy.
POPULATION: Ten expert physicians and 51 Intensive (code 56) rehabilitation in-patients were recruited.
METHODS: A cross-cultural adaptation of the scale was built from English into Italian, closely complying with international guidelines. Face validity and test-retest reliability were carried out to evaluate the comprehensibility and goodness of fit of the new scale.
RESULTS: An overall positive judgement was obtained with the face validity test. No significant differences were observed between the original and the adapted scale scoring. Internal consistency measured on 51 patients by Cronbach’s alpha was 0.702 for the scale. The estimated SEM was 1.211. ICCconsistency was 0.702. Split-Half reliability and the Spearman–Brown prophecy were 0.633 and 0.775, respectively. Test-retest reliability of the RCS-E measured with ICCagreement was 0.903.
CONCLUSION: The adapted RCS-E provides a sensitive and reliable tool that appears to be suitable for measuring clinical complexity in Italian code 56 rehabilitation units. It is the first Italian version of the scale to be devised.
CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: Further statistical validation will assess the Italian RCS-E as a possible instrument for guiding the patients’ assignment to the rehabilitation settings that best suit their specific needs. These preliminary data represent the first step through this purpose.