Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2013
Comparison of the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation-Participation with the ICF Measure of Participation and Activities Screener and the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule II in persons with spinal cord injury.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
van der Zee Carlijn H, Post Marcel W, Brinkhof Martin W, Wagenaar Robert C
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To validate the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation-Participation (USER-Participation) in persons with spinal cord injury (SCI) using 2 International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF)-based instruments: the ICF Measure of Participation and Activities-Screener (IMPACT-S) and the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II (WHODAS II).
DESIGN: Validation study. Score distributions, internal consistency, and concurrent and discriminant validity were evaluated.
SETTING: The community.
PARTICIPANTS: Convenience sample of persons (N=157) with long-term SCI living in The Netherlands.
INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: USER-Participation, IMPACT-S, and WHODAS II.
RESULTS: No instruments showed floor effects, and 3 out of 6 WHODAS II domains showed ceiling effects. Most scores showed adequate internal consistency (α≥.70), except for the USER-Participation frequency scale (.51) and 2 WHODAS II domains (.58-.60). Spearman correlation coefficients between the segregate USER-Participation scales were <.60 (range, .39-.46), showing that they cover separate aspects of participation. Concurrent validity of the USER-Participation was shown because >75% (83.3%) of the 24 hypotheses (Spearman correlation coefficients above or below .60) with the other measurement instruments were confirmed. Concurrent validity between the IMPACT-S and WHODAS II was not shown (53.8% of 13 hypotheses confirmed). All scores except 4 WHODAS II domains showed significant differences in participation between persons with paraplegia and tetraplegia.
CONCLUSIONS: The USER-Participation showed generally satisfactory psychometric properties in Dutch persons with long-term SCI living in the community. The IMPACT-S showed the best psychometric properties, and the WHODAS II showed less favorable results. Future research on the USER-Participation should focus on validation in other languages and different diagnostic groups.
DESIGN: Validation study. Score distributions, internal consistency, and concurrent and discriminant validity were evaluated.
SETTING: The community.
PARTICIPANTS: Convenience sample of persons (N=157) with long-term SCI living in The Netherlands.
INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: USER-Participation, IMPACT-S, and WHODAS II.
RESULTS: No instruments showed floor effects, and 3 out of 6 WHODAS II domains showed ceiling effects. Most scores showed adequate internal consistency (α≥.70), except for the USER-Participation frequency scale (.51) and 2 WHODAS II domains (.58-.60). Spearman correlation coefficients between the segregate USER-Participation scales were <.60 (range, .39-.46), showing that they cover separate aspects of participation. Concurrent validity of the USER-Participation was shown because >75% (83.3%) of the 24 hypotheses (Spearman correlation coefficients above or below .60) with the other measurement instruments were confirmed. Concurrent validity between the IMPACT-S and WHODAS II was not shown (53.8% of 13 hypotheses confirmed). All scores except 4 WHODAS II domains showed significant differences in participation between persons with paraplegia and tetraplegia.
CONCLUSIONS: The USER-Participation showed generally satisfactory psychometric properties in Dutch persons with long-term SCI living in the community. The IMPACT-S showed the best psychometric properties, and the WHODAS II showed less favorable results. Future research on the USER-Participation should focus on validation in other languages and different diagnostic groups.