Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: Review commonly used mobility assessment instruments and discuss their use in multidisciplinary research and clinical practice.
METHODS: Data sources include peer-reviewed articles sourced in electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL), government websites, national, and international best practice guidelines to describe frequently used mobility assessment instruments.
RESULTS: Numerous clinician-, observer-, patient-reported, and performance outcome instruments and evidence-based implementation program resources exist, though these vary in their intended purpose and setting. Wearable and ambient sensors provide new opportunities to collect passive, objective physical activity data and observe changes in mobility across settings.
CONCLUSIONS: Selection among multiple assessment tools requires consideration of the available evidence for use in the desired population, the outcomes of interest, whether use is feasible for the setting, and the strength of validity and reliability data for the tool.
CONCLUSIONS: Nurses, especially in the inpatient setting, are typically in most frequent contact with patients and are well-positioned to assess mobility and ensure that safe, progressive mobility care plans are in place. Development of an organization-wide mobility culture requires a systematic, multidisciplinary approach and long-term commitment.
METHODS: Data sources include peer-reviewed articles sourced in electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL), government websites, national, and international best practice guidelines to describe frequently used mobility assessment instruments.
RESULTS: Numerous clinician-, observer-, patient-reported, and performance outcome instruments and evidence-based implementation program resources exist, though these vary in their intended purpose and setting. Wearable and ambient sensors provide new opportunities to collect passive, objective physical activity data and observe changes in mobility across settings.
CONCLUSIONS: Selection among multiple assessment tools requires consideration of the available evidence for use in the desired population, the outcomes of interest, whether use is feasible for the setting, and the strength of validity and reliability data for the tool.
CONCLUSIONS: Nurses, especially in the inpatient setting, are typically in most frequent contact with patients and are well-positioned to assess mobility and ensure that safe, progressive mobility care plans are in place. Development of an organization-wide mobility culture requires a systematic, multidisciplinary approach and long-term commitment.
摘要：
目的：回顾常用的流动性评估工具，并讨论其在多学科研究和临床实践中的应用。
方法：数据来源包括电子数据库中的同行评审文章(PubMed，CINAHL)，政府网站,国家,和国际最佳做法指南，以描述经常使用的流动性评估工具。
结果：众多临床医生-，观察者-,患者报告，和绩效成果工具和基于证据的实施方案资源存在，尽管这些在它们的预期目的和设置上有所不同。可穿戴和环境传感器提供了新的机会来收集被动,客观的身体活动数据，并观察不同设置的移动性变化。
结论：在多种评估工具中进行选择需要考虑用于所需人群的可用证据，感兴趣的结果，使用是否可行的设置，以及该工具的有效性和可靠性数据的强度。
结论：护士，尤其是在住院的情况下，通常与患者接触最频繁，并且处于良好的位置以评估移动性并确保安全，渐进式流动护理计划已经到位。全组织流动文化的发展需要一个系统的，多学科方法和长期承诺。
方法：数据来源包括电子数据库中的同行评审文章(PubMed，CINAHL)，政府网站,国家,和国际最佳做法指南，以描述经常使用的流动性评估工具。
结果：众多临床医生-，观察者-,患者报告，和绩效成果工具和基于证据的实施方案资源存在，尽管这些在它们的预期目的和设置上有所不同。可穿戴和环境传感器提供了新的机会来收集被动,客观的身体活动数据，并观察不同设置的移动性变化。
结论：在多种评估工具中进行选择需要考虑用于所需人群的可用证据，感兴趣的结果，使用是否可行的设置，以及该工具的有效性和可靠性数据的强度。
结论：护士，尤其是在住院的情况下，通常与患者接触最频繁，并且处于良好的位置以评估移动性并确保安全，渐进式流动护理计划已经到位。全组织流动文化的发展需要一个系统的，多学科方法和长期承诺。
