The objective of the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) is to measure ” patients’ initial function, ongoing progress, and outcome” for a wide range of. Free online Lower Extremity Function Scale (LEFS) calculator. Home / Free Visual score (%): Lower Extremity Function Score: 80 / 80, Percentage: %. Purpose. The test can be used to evaluate the impairment of a patient with lower extremity musculoskeletal condition or disorders. Can be used.

Author: Akisida Vujin
Country: Saint Lucia
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Education
Published (Last): 22 April 2007
Pages: 474
PDF File Size: 6.27 Mb
ePub File Size: 16.35 Mb
ISBN: 146-5-26515-881-5
Downloads: 91003
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Gami

Free online Lower Extremity Function Scale (LEFS) calculator

J Body Mov Ther ; 20 4: The LEFS is efficient to administer and score and is applicable for research purposes and clinical decision making for individual patients.

Twelve of the 19 clinicians contributed data to lfs study Fig.

The total possible score of 80 indicates a high functional level Wcale. Making sharp turns while running fast. Lower Extremity Functional Scale. For the LEFS, however, no such data are available. Participants who were scheduled for lower extremity surgery were also excluded.

We surveyed existing questionnaires. Drafting of the sale Our results, coupled with those of Westaway dcale al, 45 provide support for using a prognostic rating of change as a theory for evaluating a measure’s sensitivity to change.

Each subscale score can vary from 0 to scael, with higher scores representing more desirable health states. Whether short- or long-term goals are set that are just at or greater than the MDC and MCID for the LEFS csale depend on the patient’s initial functional level, clinical history and findings, and time frames for the goals. Men and women had similar median scores 78 and 76, respectivelyand younger individuals had better scores.


The SF, however, is time-consuming to administer and score in the clinic and was not designed for individual patient decision making. This finding is of importance for future studies, as the results for a population as a whole should be interpreted with care. The implication of ceiling and floor effects is to lower the capacity to detect clinically important change in all patients. In addition, since the LEFS was designed for use in individuals with lower extremity conditions, the fact that a ceiling effect was found for healthy individuals is notable, but it should not limit the validity of the test in the population that it was designed for.

Responsiveness of four patient-reported outcome measures to assess physical function in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Two estimates of the SEM were obtained. The initial version of the scale consisted of 22 items. No additional items were identified as important to include in the LEFS les these additional processes.

If you believe that this Physiopedia article is the primary source for the information you are refering to, you can use the button below to access a related lffs statement.

Lifting an object, like a bag of groceries from the floor. That is, a change of more than 9 points represents a true change in the patient’s condition. J Epidemiol Community Health ; 55 2: It would be more appropriate to do a separate analysis of the results for different age categories, particularly young patients and elderly patients.

Pearson correlations and one-way analyses of variance were used to examine construct validity. In addition, the SF acute version was administered during the initial assessment and at the weekly follow-up assessments.

Normative data for the lower extremity functional scale (LEFS)

That is, the tabulated score is within 5 points of a patient’s “true” score. The correlations relating to change scores are presented in Table 5. The questionnaire was filled out by 1, individuals. Spearman rank-order correlation coefficients were used to examine the relationship between the prognostic rating and change in the following functional status scores at 1 week and 3 weeks: Clinicians’ judgments of MCID were compared with the statistical approach.

  HCPL 7101 PDF

A minimum of volunteers had to be included at each hospital.

Participants were excluded if they had undergone lower extremity surgery scake 1 year lefx filling out the questionnaire, or were scheduled for lower extremity surgery. Clinicians were asked to estimate the amount of change that they would consider to be clinically important for initial LEFS scores of 10, 25, 40, 55, and As data collection took several days at each hospital, after each day we checked the numbers of men and women and the distribution across different age categories.

Normative data for the lower extremity functional scale (LEFS)

Toggle navigation p Physiopedia. Getting into or out of the bath.

Support Center Support Center. Spearman rank-order correlation coefficients were used to examine the relationship between an independent prognostic rating of change for each patient and change in the LEFS and SF scores. In our study, we also used llefs rating of expected change as the theory for change. Subsequent inquiry concerning the LEFS should center on head-to-head comparisons with condition- disease- or region-specific measures. Wound infections following implant removal below the knee: In addition, they were asked whether they were currently scheduled for lower extremity surgery.

Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: Defining the minimum level of detectable change for the Roland-Morris Questionnaire.

Subscribe US Now