A comparison of two functional tests in quadriplegia: The quadriplegia index of function and the functional independence measure

Individuals with spinal cord injury are evaluated according to a set of guidelines based on motor, sensory, and functional tests. The resulting scores are used to quantify the extent of neurological injury and functional loss. The purpose of the present study was to compare certain scoring systems using the same group of patients. Twenty-nine subjects with cervical spine cord injury were evaluated by the same examiner using three scales: (1) The American Spinal Cord Injury Association (ASIA) (2) The Quadriplegia Index of Function (QIF) (3) The Functional Independence Measure (FIM) Assessments were made both at admission to, and discharge from, the rehabilitation center. Positive change in motor score is widely used as an indicator of recovery after spinal cord injury. We assessed the relationship of the two functional tests, the FIM and the QIF, to ASIA scores and found strong correlations in both cases. The feeding and dressing categories of QIF showed an even stronger correlation to ASIA motor scores, though the statistical significance was the same for corresponding categories of FIM and QIF. The percent of recovery on ASIA motor scores was significantly correlated only to gain in QIF scores, not FIM. FIM lacks the category of bed activities. Some additions to the FIM may be useful, especially in the feeding and dressing categories, and a category of bed activities could be included as well, in order to improve sensitivity.