These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Validity and responsiveness of the care and needs scale for assessing support needs after traumatic brain injury.
    Author: Soo C, Tate RL, Aird V, Allaous J, Browne S, Carr B, Coulston C, Diffley L, Gurka J, Hummell J.
    Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 2010 Jun; 91(6):905-12. PubMed ID: 20510982.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To investigate the validity and responsiveness of the Care and Needs Scale (CANS), which was designed to assess support needs of people with traumatic brain injury (TBI). DESIGN: Two samples of community clients (n=38, n=30) were recruited to examine concurrent, convergent/divergent, and discriminant validity. The ability of the CANS to detect change over a 6-month period from the time of inpatient rehabilitation discharge (predictive validity and responsiveness) was investigated in a third sample of 40 rehabilitation inpatients. SETTING: Two Brain Injury Rehabilitation Units in Sydney, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: People (N=108) aged between 16 and 70 years admitted for rehabilitation after TBI. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The CANS, Supervision Rating Scale, FIM, Sydney Psychosocial Reintegration Scale, and Disability Rating Scale. RESULTS: Evidence for concurrent validity was shown with fair to moderate correlation coefficients between the CANS and measures of supervision, functional independence, and psychosocial functioning (absolute value, r(s)=.43-.68; P<.01). Support for convergent and divergent validity was provided by correlation coefficients that were higher for measures tapping similar constructs (absolute value, r(s)=46; P<.01) but lower for measures of dissimilar constructs (absolute value, r(s)=.07-.26; not significant). In addition, the CANS discriminated between levels of injury severity, functional independence, and overall functioning (P<.01). In terms of predictive validity and responsiveness, CANS scores at inpatient rehabilitation discharge predicted the participant's functioning 6 months later. CONCLUSIONS: These results show the CANS is a valid and responsive tool and, together with its previously shown reliability, is suitable for routine application in clinical and research practice.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]