We're hiring! Browse jobs and apply today.
The FABS/M assesses mobility limitations among people with lower limb impairments.
133
60-90 minutes
60 to 90 minutes for the hard copy version, a web based version is also available.
Adolescent
13 - 17
yearsAdult
18 - 64
yearsElderly Adult
65 +
yearsDo you see an error or have a suggestion for this instrument summary? Please e-mail us!
People with Mobility Impairment: (Gray, et al, 2008)
FABS/M Normative Data for SCI and Stroke: |
|
|
FABS/M Domain | SCI | Stroke |
Community Primary Mobility Device Use Frequency | 3.53 | 3.07 |
Community Primary Mobility Device Use Magnitude | 3.58 | 3.53 |
Home Features Frequency | 3.78 | 3.65 |
Home Features Magnitude | 3.37 | 3.08 |
Community Features Frequency | 3.05 | 2.87 |
Community Features Magnitude | 3.37 | 3.27 |
Community Natural Frequenc | 3.04 | 3.07 |
Community Natural Magnitude | 2.24 | 2.11 |
Community Site Access Magnitude | 3.55 | 3.24 |
Community Parking Limited | 0.13 | 0.08 |
Community Structures Limited | 0.28 | 0.14 |
Community Contacts Frequency | 3.06 | 3.57 |
Community Care Help | 4.42 | 4.27 |
Community Attitude Help | 4.25 | 4.13 |
Community Restroom Accessible | 2.29 | 2.46 |
Community Transport Accessible | 2.42 | 2.52 |
People with Mobility Impairment: (Gray, et al, 2006; n = 604; mean age = 51.5 (range = 17-92) years; 37% used canes, crutches, or walkers, 17% used Power wheelchair, 14% used manual wheelchair and 15% used scooters, Diagnosis included: Polio Survivors (28%), SCI patients (23%), MS patients (21%) and CP patients (15%))
FABS/M Test-retest Reliability: |
|
|
|
|
| Domain | #Items | Strength | test-retest r |
1 | Personal Mobility Device Domain | 1 | N/A | N/A |
2 | Home Built Features Domain |
|
|
|
| Frequency of influencing participation | 12 | Excellent | 0.65 |
| Magnitude of influencing participation | 12 | Excellent | 0.67 |
3 | Community Built & Natural Features Domain |
|
|
|
| Built |
|
|
|
| Frequency of influencing participation | 8 | Excellent | 0.75 |
| Magnitude of influencing participation | 8 | Excellent | 0.66 |
| Natural |
|
|
|
| Frequency of influencing participation | 6 | Excellent | 0.63 |
| Magnitude of influencing participation | 6 | Adequate | 0.52 |
4 | Community Destinations Access Domain |
|
|
|
| Magnitude of influencing participation | 13 | Excellent | 0.62 |
| Parking limits participation | 13 | Excellent | 0.82 |
5 | Community Facilities Access Domain |
|
|
|
| Restrooms accessibility | 8 | Excellent | 0.70 |
| Transportation accessibility | 6 | Excellent | 0.66 |
6 | Community Support Network Domain |
|
|
|
| Services |
|
|
|
| Frequency of contact | 9 | Excellent | 0.81 |
| Magnitude of help | 9 | Excellent | 0.77 |
| Attitudes |
|
|
|
| Magnitude of help | 9 | Excellent | 0.77 |
People with Mobility Impairment: (Gray, et al, 2006)
FABS/M Internal Validity: |
|
|
|
|
| Domain | #Items | Strength | Alpha |
1 | Personal Mobility Device Domain | 1 | N/A | N/A |
2 | Home Built Features Domain |
|
|
|
| Frequency of influencing participation | 12 | Poor | 0.60 |
| Magnitude of influencing participation | 12 | Poor | 0.68 |
3 | Community Built & Natural Features Domain |
|
|
|
| Built |
|
|
|
| Frequency of influencing participation | 8 | Adequate | 0.78 |
| Magnitude of influencing participation | 8 | Poor | 0.64 |
| Natural |
|
|
|
| Frequency of influencing participation | 6 | Poor | 0.65 |
| Magnitude of influencing participation | 6 | Poor | 0.35 |
4 | Community Destinations Access Domain |
|
|
|
| Magnitude of influencing participation | 13 | Excellent | 0.94 |
| Parking limits participation | 13 | Excellent | 0.89 |
5 | Community Facilities Access Domain |
|
|
|
| Restrooms accessibility | 8 | Excellent | 0.90 |
| Transportation accessibility | 6 | Adequate | 0.72 |
6 | Community Support Network Domain |
|
|
|
| Services |
|
|
|
| Frequency of contact | 9 | Poor | 0.67 |
| Magnitude of help | 9 | Adequate | 0.70 |
| Attitudes |
|
|
|
| Magnitude of help | 9 | Adequate | 0.76 |
People with Mobility Impairment: (Gray, et al, 2006)
Discriminant validity of the FABS/M was supported by the differences in scores for environmental features by diagnostic category and assitive device groups. See Gray et al (2008) for more information.
Interviews used to develop the measure were based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health as a conceptual framework.
The PARTS/M was developed with the help of persons with mobility limitations. The views of these participants were captured through personal interviews, concept focus groups, and content focus groups
Gray, D. B., Hollingsworth, H. H., et al. (2008). "A subjective measure of environmental facilitators and barriers to participation for people with mobility limitations." Disabil Rehabil 30(6): 434-457. Find it on PubMed
Gray, D. B., Hollingsworth, H. H., et al. (2006). "Participation survey/mobility: psychometric properties of a measure of participation for people with mobility impairments and limitations." Arch Phys Med Rehabil 87(16442971): 189-197. Find it on PubMed
Tomey, K. M. and Sowers, M. R. (2009). "Assessment of physical functioning: a conceptual model encompassing environmental factors and individual compensation strategies." Phys Ther 89(7): 705-714. Find it on PubMed
We have reviewed more than 500 instruments for use with a number of diagnoses including stroke, spinal cord injury and traumatic brain injury among several others.