title: Validity of the AusTOM scales: a comparison of the AusTOMs and EuroQol-5D.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Clinicians require brief outcome measures in their busy daily practice to document global client outcomes. Based on the UK Therapy Outcome Measure, the Australian Therapy Outcome Measures were designed to capture global therapy outcomes of occupational therapy, physiotherapy and speech pathology in the Australian clinical context. The aim of this study was to investigate the construct (convergent) validity of the Australian Therapy Outcome Measures (AusTOMs) by comparing it with the EuroQuol-5D (EQ-5D).
  
  
  METHODS
  The research was a prospective, longitudinal cohort study, with data collected over a seven month time period. The study was conducted at a total of 13 metropolitan and rural health-care sites including acute, sub-acute and community facilities. Two-hundred and five clients were asked to score themselves on the EQ-5D, and the same clients were scored by approximately 115 therapists (physiotherapists, speech pathologists and occupational therapists) using the AusTOMs at admission and discharge. Clients were consecutive admissions who agreed to participate in the study. Clients of all diagnoses, aged 18 years and over (a criteria of the EQ-5D), and able to give informed consent were scored on the measures. Spearman rank order correlation coefficients were used to analyze the relationships between scores from the two tools. The clients were scored on the AusTOMs and EQ-5D.
  
  
  RESULTS
  There were many health care areas where correlations were expected and found between scores on the AusTOMs and the EQ-5D.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  In the quest to measure the effectiveness of therapy services, managers, health care founders and clinicians are urgently seeking to undertake the first step by identifying tools that can measure therapy outcome. AusTOMs is one tool that can measure global client outcomes following therapy. In this study, it was found that on the whole, the AusTOMs and the EQ-5D measure similar constructs. Hence, although the validity of a tool is never 'proven', this study offers preliminary support for the construct validity of AusTOMs.
authors.affiliation: School of Public Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Vic 3086, Australia. c.unsworth@latrobe.edu.au <c.unsworth@latrobe.edu.au>
authors.forename: Carolyn A
authors.initials: CA
authors.lastname: Unsworth
authors.forename: Stephen J
authors.initials: SJ
authors.lastname: Duckett
authors.forename: Dianne
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Duncombe
authors.forename: Alison
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Perry
authors.forename: Jemma
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Skeat
authors.forename: Nicholas
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Taylor
mesh_terms: D000208:Acute Disease; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001315:Australia; D006233:Persons with Disabilities / Q000534:rehabilitation*; D005060:Europe; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009788:Occupational Therapy; D017063:Outcome Assessment, Health Care / Q000379:methods*; D026741:Physical Therapy Modalities; D011446:Prospective Studies; D011788:Quality of Life; D019035:Rural Health Services / Q000592:standards; D018434:Sickness Impact Profile; D013066:Speech-Language Pathology; D019037:Urban Health Services / Q000592:standards