A prospective evaluation of the WeeFIM in patients with cerebral palsy undergoing orthopaedic surgery

James O. Sanders, Sharon L. McConnell, Ron King, Alice Lanford, Kathleen Montpetit, Philip Gates, Margaret M. Rich, Karin Shepherd, Tim Cupp, Richard Haynes, Patricia Bush, Fares Tahir, Julius Santiago, Donald E. Lighter, Cathy Smrcina, Mark L. Niederpruem, Craig M McDonald, Darryl B. Curry

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE: Although frequently used in pediatric rehabilitation settings, the WeeFIM has not been tested in surgical pediatric orthopaedic patients. METHODS: The WeeFIM was administered to patients with surgical cerebral palsy at defined intervals preoperatively and at both 6 and 12 months postoperatively. The age-adjusted change scores from baseline to follow-up were tested both parametrically and nonparametrically. RESULTS: Four hundred sixty-eight patients had baseline evaluations. There were 161 six-month follow-up assessments and 108 twelve-month follow-up assessments. The baseline WeeFIM was able to separate children with different patterns of cerebral palsy. Hemiplegic patients had higher scores than diplegic and tetraplegic patients. Overall age-adjusted scores were improved at both 6 (mean increase 2.0) and 12 months (mean increase 2.2). The instrument showed significant ceiling effects for diplegic and hemiplegic patients with lower or upper extremity surgery and limited responsiveness for lower extremity surgery in tetraplegic patients. Parametrically, it showed improvements in mobility for both rhizotomy and tetraplegic upper extremity surgery. Nonparametric tests were not significant for rhizotomy mobility improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Although the WeeFIM adequately reflects the severity of neurological involvement in pediatric orthopaedic patients with cerebral palsy, it has a significant ceiling effect in diplegic and hemiplegic patients limiting responsiveness and lacks content validity for tetraplegic patients. The instrument may have some use in tetraplegic patients with upper extremity surgery and in rhizotomy patients. We recommend against its general use for orthopaedic surgery in patients with cerebral palsy lower extremity or spine surgery and in hemiplegic patients with upper extremity surgery.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)542-546
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Pediatric Orthopaedics
Volume26
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2006
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Cerebral Palsy
Orthopedics
Rhizotomy
Upper Extremity
Pediatrics
Lower Extremity
Spine
Rehabilitation

Keywords

  • Cerebral palsy
  • Functional outcomes
  • Surgery
  • WeeFIM

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health
  • Surgery
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

Sanders, J. O., McConnell, S. L., King, R., Lanford, A., Montpetit, K., Gates, P., ... Curry, D. B. (2006). A prospective evaluation of the WeeFIM in patients with cerebral palsy undergoing orthopaedic surgery. Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics, 26(4), 542-546. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.bpo.0000226272.78330.bb

A prospective evaluation of the WeeFIM in patients with cerebral palsy undergoing orthopaedic surgery. / Sanders, James O.; McConnell, Sharon L.; King, Ron; Lanford, Alice; Montpetit, Kathleen; Gates, Philip; Rich, Margaret M.; Shepherd, Karin; Cupp, Tim; Haynes, Richard; Bush, Patricia; Tahir, Fares; Santiago, Julius; Lighter, Donald E.; Smrcina, Cathy; Niederpruem, Mark L.; McDonald, Craig M; Curry, Darryl B.

In: Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics, Vol. 26, No. 4, 07.2006, p. 542-546.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sanders, JO, McConnell, SL, King, R, Lanford, A, Montpetit, K, Gates, P, Rich, MM, Shepherd, K, Cupp, T, Haynes, R, Bush, P, Tahir, F, Santiago, J, Lighter, DE, Smrcina, C, Niederpruem, ML, McDonald, CM & Curry, DB 2006, 'A prospective evaluation of the WeeFIM in patients with cerebral palsy undergoing orthopaedic surgery', Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 542-546. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.bpo.0000226272.78330.bb
Sanders, James O. ; McConnell, Sharon L. ; King, Ron ; Lanford, Alice ; Montpetit, Kathleen ; Gates, Philip ; Rich, Margaret M. ; Shepherd, Karin ; Cupp, Tim ; Haynes, Richard ; Bush, Patricia ; Tahir, Fares ; Santiago, Julius ; Lighter, Donald E. ; Smrcina, Cathy ; Niederpruem, Mark L. ; McDonald, Craig M ; Curry, Darryl B. / A prospective evaluation of the WeeFIM in patients with cerebral palsy undergoing orthopaedic surgery. In: Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics. 2006 ; Vol. 26, No. 4. pp. 542-546.
@article{d0d1d5d098294afa9d2c324994b5b457,
title = "A prospective evaluation of the WeeFIM in patients with cerebral palsy undergoing orthopaedic surgery",
abstract = "PURPOSE: Although frequently used in pediatric rehabilitation settings, the WeeFIM has not been tested in surgical pediatric orthopaedic patients. METHODS: The WeeFIM was administered to patients with surgical cerebral palsy at defined intervals preoperatively and at both 6 and 12 months postoperatively. The age-adjusted change scores from baseline to follow-up were tested both parametrically and nonparametrically. RESULTS: Four hundred sixty-eight patients had baseline evaluations. There were 161 six-month follow-up assessments and 108 twelve-month follow-up assessments. The baseline WeeFIM was able to separate children with different patterns of cerebral palsy. Hemiplegic patients had higher scores than diplegic and tetraplegic patients. Overall age-adjusted scores were improved at both 6 (mean increase 2.0) and 12 months (mean increase 2.2). The instrument showed significant ceiling effects for diplegic and hemiplegic patients with lower or upper extremity surgery and limited responsiveness for lower extremity surgery in tetraplegic patients. Parametrically, it showed improvements in mobility for both rhizotomy and tetraplegic upper extremity surgery. Nonparametric tests were not significant for rhizotomy mobility improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Although the WeeFIM adequately reflects the severity of neurological involvement in pediatric orthopaedic patients with cerebral palsy, it has a significant ceiling effect in diplegic and hemiplegic patients limiting responsiveness and lacks content validity for tetraplegic patients. The instrument may have some use in tetraplegic patients with upper extremity surgery and in rhizotomy patients. We recommend against its general use for orthopaedic surgery in patients with cerebral palsy lower extremity or spine surgery and in hemiplegic patients with upper extremity surgery.",
keywords = "Cerebral palsy, Functional outcomes, Surgery, WeeFIM",
author = "Sanders, {James O.} and McConnell, {Sharon L.} and Ron King and Alice Lanford and Kathleen Montpetit and Philip Gates and Rich, {Margaret M.} and Karin Shepherd and Tim Cupp and Richard Haynes and Patricia Bush and Fares Tahir and Julius Santiago and Lighter, {Donald E.} and Cathy Smrcina and Niederpruem, {Mark L.} and McDonald, {Craig M} and Curry, {Darryl B.}",
year = "2006",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1097/01.bpo.0000226272.78330.bb",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "26",
pages = "542--546",
journal = "Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics",
issn = "0271-6798",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A prospective evaluation of the WeeFIM in patients with cerebral palsy undergoing orthopaedic surgery

AU - Sanders, James O.

AU - McConnell, Sharon L.

AU - King, Ron

AU - Lanford, Alice

AU - Montpetit, Kathleen

AU - Gates, Philip

AU - Rich, Margaret M.

AU - Shepherd, Karin

AU - Cupp, Tim

AU - Haynes, Richard

AU - Bush, Patricia

AU - Tahir, Fares

AU - Santiago, Julius

AU - Lighter, Donald E.

AU - Smrcina, Cathy

AU - Niederpruem, Mark L.

AU - McDonald, Craig M

AU - Curry, Darryl B.

PY - 2006/7

Y1 - 2006/7

N2 - PURPOSE: Although frequently used in pediatric rehabilitation settings, the WeeFIM has not been tested in surgical pediatric orthopaedic patients. METHODS: The WeeFIM was administered to patients with surgical cerebral palsy at defined intervals preoperatively and at both 6 and 12 months postoperatively. The age-adjusted change scores from baseline to follow-up were tested both parametrically and nonparametrically. RESULTS: Four hundred sixty-eight patients had baseline evaluations. There were 161 six-month follow-up assessments and 108 twelve-month follow-up assessments. The baseline WeeFIM was able to separate children with different patterns of cerebral palsy. Hemiplegic patients had higher scores than diplegic and tetraplegic patients. Overall age-adjusted scores were improved at both 6 (mean increase 2.0) and 12 months (mean increase 2.2). The instrument showed significant ceiling effects for diplegic and hemiplegic patients with lower or upper extremity surgery and limited responsiveness for lower extremity surgery in tetraplegic patients. Parametrically, it showed improvements in mobility for both rhizotomy and tetraplegic upper extremity surgery. Nonparametric tests were not significant for rhizotomy mobility improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Although the WeeFIM adequately reflects the severity of neurological involvement in pediatric orthopaedic patients with cerebral palsy, it has a significant ceiling effect in diplegic and hemiplegic patients limiting responsiveness and lacks content validity for tetraplegic patients. The instrument may have some use in tetraplegic patients with upper extremity surgery and in rhizotomy patients. We recommend against its general use for orthopaedic surgery in patients with cerebral palsy lower extremity or spine surgery and in hemiplegic patients with upper extremity surgery.

AB - PURPOSE: Although frequently used in pediatric rehabilitation settings, the WeeFIM has not been tested in surgical pediatric orthopaedic patients. METHODS: The WeeFIM was administered to patients with surgical cerebral palsy at defined intervals preoperatively and at both 6 and 12 months postoperatively. The age-adjusted change scores from baseline to follow-up were tested both parametrically and nonparametrically. RESULTS: Four hundred sixty-eight patients had baseline evaluations. There were 161 six-month follow-up assessments and 108 twelve-month follow-up assessments. The baseline WeeFIM was able to separate children with different patterns of cerebral palsy. Hemiplegic patients had higher scores than diplegic and tetraplegic patients. Overall age-adjusted scores were improved at both 6 (mean increase 2.0) and 12 months (mean increase 2.2). The instrument showed significant ceiling effects for diplegic and hemiplegic patients with lower or upper extremity surgery and limited responsiveness for lower extremity surgery in tetraplegic patients. Parametrically, it showed improvements in mobility for both rhizotomy and tetraplegic upper extremity surgery. Nonparametric tests were not significant for rhizotomy mobility improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Although the WeeFIM adequately reflects the severity of neurological involvement in pediatric orthopaedic patients with cerebral palsy, it has a significant ceiling effect in diplegic and hemiplegic patients limiting responsiveness and lacks content validity for tetraplegic patients. The instrument may have some use in tetraplegic patients with upper extremity surgery and in rhizotomy patients. We recommend against its general use for orthopaedic surgery in patients with cerebral palsy lower extremity or spine surgery and in hemiplegic patients with upper extremity surgery.

KW - Cerebral palsy

KW - Functional outcomes

KW - Surgery

KW - WeeFIM

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33748663277&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33748663277&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/01.bpo.0000226272.78330.bb

DO - 10.1097/01.bpo.0000226272.78330.bb

M3 - Article

C2 - 16791077

AN - SCOPUS:33748663277

VL - 26

SP - 542

EP - 546

JO - Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics

JF - Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics

SN - 0271-6798

IS - 4

ER -