Free
Research Article
Issue Date: January 1997
Published Online: January 01, 1997
Updated: April 30, 2020
Equivalence Reliability of the Functional Independence Measure for Children (WeeFIM®) Administration Methods
Patricia A. Sperle; Kenneth J. Ottenbacher; Susan L. Braun; Shelly J. Lane; Susan Nochajski
Author Affiliations
  • Patricia A. Sperle, MS, OTR, is Occupational Therapist in Buffalo, New York. At the time of this study, she was Occupational Therapist, University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York
  • Kenneth J. Ottenbacher, PhD, OTR, is Professor and Vice Dean, Dean’s Office, School of Allied Health Sciences, University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, 301 University Boulevard, Galveston, Texas 77555-1028
  • Susan L. Braun, MLS, OTR, is Director of WeeFIM Services, Uniform Data Systems, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York
  • Shelly J. Lane, PhD, OTR, is Associate Professor, Department of Occupational Therapy, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York
  • Susan Nochajski, PhD, OTR, is Assistant Professor, Department of Occupational Therapy, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York
Article Information
Pediatric Evaluation and Intervention / School-Based Practice / Research
Research Article   |   January 01, 1997
Equivalence Reliability of the Functional Independence Measure for Children (WeeFIM®) Administration Methods
American Journal of Occupational Therapy, January 1997, Vol. 51, 35-41. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.51.1.35
American Journal of Occupational Therapy, January 1997, Vol. 51, 35-41. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.51.1.35
This content is PDF only. Please click on the PDF icon to access.
Abstract

Objective. This study examined the equivalence reliability of two administration methods for the Functional Independence Measure for Children (WeeFlM®). The two methods were direct observation of child performance and parental interview.

Method. Thirty children between the ages of 19 months and 71 months with identified developmental disabilities were included in this study. The direct observation and interview methods were administered in random order to each subject within a 3-week period. The direct observation was completed in the educational setting, and the WeeFIM interview was obtained by either in-person interview or telephone interview with the parent.

Results. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for total WeeFIM ratings was .93, indicating consistency between the two administration methods. Analysis of the WeeFIM Motor (13 items) and Cognitive (5 items) domains yielded ICC values of .93 and .75, respectively, suggesting greater consistency for items measuring motor related skills.

Conclusion. The results demonstrate good agreement for total ratings when the WeeFIM is administered by direct observation and by interview with a parent. The findings establish the clinical usefulness of information collected by clinical interview.