High test-retest reliability was found for the Function component , while results for the Disability component were more variable .
Conclusions There is extensive evidence to support the construct validity and sensitivity to change of the LLFDI among various clinical population s of community-dwelling older adults .
Background The choice of measure for use as a primary outcome in geriatric research is contingent upon the construct of interest and evidence for its psychometric properties .
The Late-Life Function and Disability Instrument ( LLFDI ) has been widely used to assess functional limitations and disability in studies with older adults .
The primary aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current available evidence for the psychometric properties of the LLFDI .
Performance-Based Versus Patient-Reported Physical Function: What Are the Underlying Predictors?
Background Functional limitations have been operationally defined for studies of rehabilitation science through measures of physical performance and patient-reported function . Although conceived as representing similar concepts , differences between these 2 modes of measuring physical functioning have not been adequately characterized scientifically . Objective The purpose of this study was to compare the Short Physical Performance Battery ( SPPB ) with the function component of the Late-Life Function and Disability Instrument ( LLFDI ) with respect to their association with physiologic factors and other psychosocial and health factors potentially influencing rehabilitative care . Design This study was a cross-sectional analysis of baseline data from a sample of community-dwelling older adults ( N=137 ) with mobility limitations enrolled in a r and omized controlled trial of exercise . Methods A performance-based measure of function ( the SPPB ) and a self-report measure of function ( the LLFDI ) served as functional outcomes . Physiologic factors included measures of leg strength , leg velocity , and exercise tolerance test ( ETT ) duration , which served as a surrogate measure of aerobic capacity . Psychosocial and health factors included age , sex , height , body mass index , number of chronic conditions , depression , and falls efficacy . Results Separate multivariable regression models predicting SPPB and LLFDI scores described 33 % and 42 % of the variance in each outcome ( R2 ) , respectively . Leg velocity and ETT duration were positively associated with both performance-based and patient-reported functional measures . Leg strength and age were positively associated with SPPB scores , whereas number of chronic conditions , sex , and falls efficacy were associated with the LLFDI scores . Limitations This study included older adults with mobility limitations and may not generalize to other population s. Conclusions Performance-based and patient-reported measures of physical function appear to assess different aspects of an older person 's functioning . The SPPB was associated with age and physiologic factors , whereas patient-reported function measured by the LLFDI was associated with these factors as well as with psychosocial and health factors
High test-retest reliability was found for the Function component , while results for the Disability component were more variable .
Conclusions There is extensive evidence to support the construct validity and sensitivity to change of the LLFDI among various clinical population s of community-dwelling older adults .
Background The choice of measure for use as a primary outcome in geriatric research is contingent upon the construct of interest and evidence for its psychometric properties .
The Late-Life Function and Disability Instrument ( LLFDI ) has been widely used to assess functional limitations and disability in studies with older adults .
The primary aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current available evidence for the psychometric properties of the LLFDI .