Measuring patient-reported outcomes after discharge from inpatient rehabilitation settings

Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine

Volumn 38, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 237-242

  Coster, Wendy J ^a   Haley, Stephen M ^a   Jette, Alan M ^a  

^a BOSTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Measurement; Outcomes; Rehabilitation

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DISABILITY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HOSPITAL DISCHARGE; HUMAN; INTERVIEW; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; REHABILITATION; REHABILITATION CENTER; SELF CONCEPT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SICKNESS IMPACT PROFILE; STANDARD;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; DISABILITY EVALUATION; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS; LONGITUDINAL STUDIES; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PATIENT DISCHARGE; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REHABILITATION; REHABILITATION CENTERS; SELF EFFICACY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SICKNESS IMPACT PROFILE;

EID: 33746233436     PISSN: 16501977     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/16501970600609774     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Coster WJ, Haley SM, Andres PL, Ludlow LH, Bond T, Ni PS. Refining the conceptual basis for rehabilitation outcome measurement: personal care and instrumental activities domain. Med Care 2004; 42 (suppl 1): 62-72.
2. Coster WJ, Haley SM, Ludlow LH, Andres PL, Ni PS. Development of an applied cognition scale to measure rehabilitation outcomes. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004; 85: 2030-2035.
3. Duncan P, Jorgensen H, Wade D. Outcome measures in acute stroke trials. A systematic review and some recommendations to improve practice. Stroke 2000; 31: 1429-1438.
4. Duncan PW, Samsa GP, Weinberger M, Goldstein LB, Bonito A, Witter DM, et al. Health status of individuals with mild stroke. Stroke 1997; 28: 740-745.
5. Lai SM, Studenski S, Duncan PW, Perera S. Persisting consequences of stroke measured by the Stroke Impact Scale. Stroke 2002; 33: 1840-1844.
6. Guide for the Uniform Data Set for Medical Rehabilitation (Adult FIM) version 5.1. Buffalo: State University of NY; 1997.
7. Ware J, Kosinski M. The SF-36® Physical and Mental Health Summary Scales: A Manual for User's of Version 1.0, 2nd edn. Boston, MA: Health Assessment Lab; 2001.
8. Lai SM, Perera S, Duncan PW, Bode R. Physical and social functioning after stoke: comparison of the Stroke Impact Scale and the Short Form-36. Stroke 2003; 34: 488-493.
9. Kersten P, Mullee MA, Smith JA, McLellan L, George S. Generic health status measures are unsuitable for measuring health status in severely disabled people. Clin Rehabil 1999; 13: 219-228.
10. Andresen EM, Fouts BS, Romeis JC, Brownson CA. Performance of health-related quality-of-life instruments in a spinal cord injured population. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999; 80: 877-884.
11. Harvey RF, Jellinek HM. Functional performance assessment: a program approach. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1981; 62: 456-460.
12. Harvey RF, Silverstein B, Venzon MA, Kilgore KM, Fisher WP, Steiner M, et al. Applying psychometric criteria to functional assessment in medical rehabilitation. III. Construct validity and predicting level of care. Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 1992; 73: 887-892.
13. Desrosiers J, Rochette A, Noreau L, Bravo G, Hebert R, Boutin C. Comparison of two functional independence scales with a participation measure in post-stroke rehabilitation. Arch Gerontol Geria 2003; 37: 157-172.
14. Jette AM, Haley SM, Ni P-S. Comparison of functional status tools used in post-acute care. Health Care Fin Rev 2003; 24: 13-24.
15. Patel AT, Duncan PW, Lai SM, Studenski S. The relation between impairments and functional outcomes poststroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2000; 81: 1357-1363.
16. Haley SM, Coster WJ, Andres PL, Ludlow LH, Ni PS, Bond TL, et al. Activity outcome measurement for post-acute care. Med Care 2004; 42 (suppl 1): 49-61.
17. Haley SM, Andres PL, Coster WJ, Kosinski M, Ni PS, Jette AM. Short-form activity measure for post-acute care (AM-PAC). Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004; 85: 649-660.
18. van Balen R, Essink-Bot ML, Steyerberg EW, Cools HJM, Habbema JDF Quality of life after hip fracture: a comparison of four health status measures in 208 patients. Disabil Rehabil 2003; 25: 507-519.
19. Magaziner J, Hawkes W, Hebel JR, Zimmerman SI, Fox KM, Dolan M, et al. Recovery from hip fracture in eight areas of function. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2000; 55: M498-507.
20. World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Handicap (ICF). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.
21. Andres PL, Haley SM, Ni PS. Is patient-reported function reliable for monitoring post-acute outcomes? Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2003; 82: 614-621.
22. Petrella R, Overend T, Chesworth B. FIM after hip fracture: is telephone administration valid and sensitive to change? Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2002; 81: 639-644.
23. Heinemann AW, Linacre JM, Wright BD, Hamilton BB, Granger C. Measurement characteristics of the Functional Independence Measure. Top Stroke Rehabil 1994; 1: 1-15.
24. Stratford PW, Binkley JW, Riddle DL. Health status measures: strategies and analytic methods for assessing change scores. Phys Ther 1996; 76: 1109-1123.
25. Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, Gladman DD. Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol 2000; 53: 459-468.
26. Beaton DE, Katz JN, Fossel AH, Wright JG, Tarasuk V. Measuring the whole or the parts? Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand outcome measure in different regions of the upper extremity. J Hand Ther 2001; 14: 128-146.
27. Jacobson NS, Truax P. Clinical significance: a statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. J Consul Clin Psychol 1991; 59: 12-19.
28. SAS program version 9.0. SAS Institute, Inc.; 2004.
29. Rankin J. Cerebral vascular accidents in patients over the age of 60. II. Prognosis. Scot Med J 1957; 2: 200-215.
30. McHorney CA, Haley SM, Ware JE. Evaluation of the MOS SF-36 physical functioning scale (PF-10): II. Comparison of relative precision using likert and Rasch scoring methods. J Clin Epidemiol 1997; 50: 451-461.
31. Malzer RI. Patient performance level during inpatient physical rehabilitation: therapist, nurse and patient perspective. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1988; 69: 113-122.
32. Rogers JC, Holm MB, Beach S, Schulz R, Cipriani J, Fox A, et al. Concordance of four methods of disability assessment using performance in the home as the criterion method. Arthrit Rheum 2003; 49: 640-647.
33. Norquist JM, Fitzpatrick R, Jenkinson C. Rasch measurement in the assessment of amytrophic lateral sclerosis patients. J App Meas 2003; 4: 249-257.
34. Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status: ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 1989; 10: 407-415.
35. Liang MH. Longitudinal construct validity: establishment of clinical meaning in patient evaluative instruments. Med Care 2000; 38 (suppl II): II-84-90.