Patient orientation and reference to the ICF as challenges in outcome assessment in rehabilitation;Patientenorientierung und ICF-bezug als Herausforderungen für die Ergebnismessung in der Rehabilitation

Rehabilitation

Volumn 47, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 67-76

  Farin, E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

ICF; Outcome assessment; Patient orientation

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CLASSIFICATION; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; DISABILITY; EDUCATION; GERMANY; INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF DISEASES; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; LIFESTYLE; METHODOLOGY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT EDUCATION; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PATIENT SATISFACTION; REHABILITATION; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; COMMUNICATION; DISABILITY EVALUATION; GERMANY; INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF DISEASES; LIFE STYLE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PATIENT SATISFACTION; REHABILITATION; WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION;

EID: 42449164759     PISSN: 00343536     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-2008-1042445     Document Type: Article

References (92)

1. Bohrnstedt GW. Measurement. In: Rossi PH, Wright JD, Anderson AB (Hrsg). Handbook of survey research. New York: Academic Press 1983 ; 69-120
2. Haigh R, Tennant A, Biering-Sorensen F et al. The use of outcome measures in physical medicine and rehabilitation within Europe. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2001; 33: 273-278
3. Mead N, Bower P. Patient-centredness: A conceptual framework and review of the literature. Social Science and Medicine 2000; 51: 1087-1110
4. Whiteneck GG, Gerhart KA. Role of survey research in assessing rehabilitation outcome. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2001; 80 (4): 305-309
5. Deutsches Institut für medizinische Dokumentation und Information (DIMDI). Internationale Klassifikation der Funktionsfähigkeit, Behinderung und Gesundheit - ICF. Köln: DIMDI 2005 - auch verfügbar unter: www.dimdi.de
6. Gauthier AK, Clancy CM. Consumer-driven health care - Beyond rhetoric with research and experience [Editorial]. Health Services Research 2004; 39 (4): 1049-1054
7. Stryer DB, Siegel JE, Rodgers AB. Outcomes research. Priorities for an evolving field. Medical Care 2004; 42 (4 suppl): III-1-III-5
8. Sachverständigenrat für die Konzertierte Aktion im Gesundheitswesen. Gutachten 2003: Finanzierung, Nutzerorientierung und Qualität. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2003 - auch verfügbar unter: www.svr-gesundheit.de
9. Vogt F, Schwappach DLB, Bridges JFP. Accounting for tastes: a German perspective on the inclusion of patient preferences in healthcare. Pharmacoeconomics 2006; 24 (5): 419-423
10. Scheibler F. 3. Tagung des Förderschwerpunktes ,,Der Patient als Partner im medizinischen Entscheidungsprozess". Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz 2005; 48: 796-802
11. Abma TA. Patients as partners in a health research agenda setting: the feasibility of a participatory methodology. Evaluation & The Health Professions 2006; 29 (4): 424-439
12. Caron-Flinterman JF, Broerse JEW, BundersJFG. The experiential knowledge of patients: a new resource for biomedical research? Social Science & Medicine 2005; 60: 2575-2584
13. Wressle E, Olofsson AE, Marcusson J, Henriksson C. Improved client participation in the rehabilitation process using a client-centred goal formulation structure. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2002; 34: 5-11
14. Plantinga LC, Fink NE, Bass EB, Boulware LE, Meyer KB, Powe NR. Preferences for current health and their association with outcomes in patients with kidney disease. Medical Care 2007; 45 (3): 230-237
15. Faller H, Vogel H, Bosch B. Erwartungen von Rehabilitanden hinsichtlich der Methoden und Ergebnisse ihrer Rehabilitation - Eine kontrollierte Studie mit Rückenschmerz- und onkologischen Patienten. Rehabilitation 2000; 39: 205-214
16. Siegert RJ, Taylor WJ. Theoretical aspects of goal-setting and motivation in rehabilitation. Disability & Rehabilitation 2004; 26 (1): 1-8
17. Heisler M, Vijan S, Anderson RM, Ubel PA, Bernstein SJ, Hofer TP. When do patients and their physicians agree on diabetes treatment goals and strategies, and what difference does it make? Journal of General Internal Medicine 2003; 18 (11): 893-902
18. Locke EA, Latham GP. Building a practically useful theory of goalsetting and task motivation. American Psychologist 2002; 57 (9): 705-717
19. Malec JF. Goal attainment scaling in rehabilitation. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation 1999; 9 (3/3): 253-275
20. Gerdes N, Baum R, Greulich W, Schüwer U, Jäcket WH. Eingangsbelastung der Patient(inn)en und Ergebnisqualität der Rehabilitation nach Schlaganfall. Rehabilitation 2003; 42: 269-283
21. Zwingmann C. Zielorientierte Ergebnismessung (ZOE) mit dem IRESPatientenfragebogen: Eine kritische Zwischenbilanz. Rehabilitation 2003; 42: 226-235
22. Hurn J, Kneebone I, Cropley M. Goal setting as an outcome measure: a systematic review. Clinical Rehabilitation 2006; 20: 756-772
23. Rushton PW, Miller WC. Goal attainment scaling in the rehabilitation of patients with lower-extremity amputations: A pilot study. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2002; 83: 771-775
24. Liu C, MacNeil JE, Greenwood R. Rehabilitation outcomes after brain injury: disability measures or goal achievement? Clinical Rehabilitation 2004; 18 (4): 398-404
25. Bergelt C, Welk H, Koch U. Erwartungen, Befürchtungen und Therapieziele von Patienten zu Beginn einer onkologischen Rehabilitationsmaßnahme. Rehabilitation 2000; 39 (6): 338-349
26. Semmer N, Frese M. Action theory in clinical psychology. In: Frese M, Sabini J (Hrsg). Goal-directed behavior: The concept of action in psychology. Hillsdale: Erlbaum 1985; 296-310
27. Schulmann-Green DJ, Naik AD, Bradley EH, MacCorkle R, Bogardus ST. Goal setting as a shared decision making strategy among clinicians and their older patients. Patient Education & Counseling 2006; 63 (1-2): 145-151
28. Parry RH. Communication during goal-setting in physiotherapy treatment sessions. Clinical Rehabilitation 2004; 18: 668-682
29. Devlin NJ, Hansen P, Selai C. Understanding health state valuations: A qualitative analysis of respondents' comments. Quality of Life Research 2004; 13:1265-1277
30. Froberg DG, Kane RL. Methodology for measuring health-state preferences, I: Measurement strategies. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1989; 42: 345-354
31. Bradley EH, Bogardus ST, Tinetti ME, Inouye SK. Goal-setting in clinical medicine. Social Science and Medicine 1999; 49 (2): 267-278
32. Prüfer P, Rexroth M. Verfahren zur Evaluation von Survey-Fragen: Ein Überblick. ZUMA-Arbeitsbericht 1996; 5): 95-115
33. Willis GB. Cognitive interviewing. A tool for improving questionnaire designs. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications 2005
34. Stewart DW, Rook DW, Shamdasani PN. Focus groups: theory and practice. 2. Aufl. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications 2006
35. Lehoux P, Poland B, Daudelin G. Focus group research and "the patient's view". Social Science and Medicine 2006; 63 (8): 2091-2104
36. Wright D, Corner J, Hopkinson J, Foster C. Listening to the views of people affected by cancer about cancer research: an example of participatory research in setting the cancer research agenda. Health Expectations 2006; 9(1): 3-12
37. Klages U. Multidisziplinäre Behandlung chronischer Polyarthritis. Statistisch und klinisch signifikante Veränderungen des Schmerzerlebens. Der Schmerz 2005; 19 (1): 26-39
38. Beninato M, Gill-Body KM, Sales S, Stark PC, Black-Schaffer RM, Stein J. Determination of the minimal clinically important difference in the FIM instrument in patients with stroke. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2006; 87: 32-39
39. Coeytaux RR, Kaufman JS, Chao R, Mann JD, Vellis RF De. Four methods of estimating the minimal important difference score were compared to establish a clinically significant change in Headache Impact Test. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2006; 59: 374-380
40. Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status: ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Controlled Clinical Trials 1989; 10: 407-415
41. Guyatt GH, Osoba D, Wu AW, Wyrwich KW, Norman GR, Clinical Significance Consensus Meeting Group. Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures. Mayo Clinic Proceedings 2002; 77: 371-383
42. Sloan JA, Cella D, Hays RD. Clinical significance of patient-reported questionnaire data: another step towards consensus [Editorial]. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2005; 58: 1217-1219
43. Berkanovic E, Hurwicz M-L, Lachenbruch PA. Concordant and discrepant views of patients' physical functioning. Arthritis Care & Research 1995; 8 (2): 94-101
44. Hewlett SA. Patients and clinicians have different perspectives on outcomes in arthritis. Journal of Rheumatology 2003; 30: 877-879
45. Janse AJ, Gemke RJBJ, Uiterwaal CSPM, Tweel I van der, Kimpen JLL, Sinnema G. Quality of life: patients and doctors don't always agree: a meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2004; 57: 653-661
46. Farin E, Fleitz A. Die Beurteilung von Mobilität und Selbstversorgung auf der Basis der ICF: Die Übereinstimmung von Patient- und Arzt-Urteil in der Rehabilitation muskuloskeletaler Erkrankungen [Kurzfassung]. In: Deutsche Rentenversicherung Bund (Hrsg). Tagungsband, ,,Gesund älter werden - mit Prävention und Rehabilitation", 16. Rehabilitationswissenschaftliches Kolloquium vom 26. bis 28. März 2007 in Berlin. DRV-Schriften 2007; (92): 140-142
47. Snow AL, Cook KF, Lin P, Morgan RO, Magaziner J. Proxies and other external raters: Methodological considerations. Health Services Research 2005; 40 (5): 1676-1693
48. Pickard AS, Knight SJ. Proxy evaluation of health-related quality of life. Medical Care 2005; 43 (5): 493-499
49. Balint E, Courtenay M, Elder A, Hull S, Julian P. The doctor, the patient and the group: Balint revisited. London: Routledge 1993
50. Farin E, Follert P, Jäckel WH. Die Therapiezielfestlegung bei Patienten mit psychischen Belastungen in der orthopädischen und kardiologischen Rehabilitation. Rehabilitation 2002; 41 (6): 389-400
51. Farin E, Frey C, Glattacker M, Jäckel WH. Goals in cardiac rehabilitation - Influencing factors, relation to outcome, and relevance of physicians' illness perception. Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation and Prevention 2007; 27 (3): 180-188
52. Bredart A, Bouleuc C, Dolbeault S. Doctor-patient communication and satisfaction with care in oncology. Current Opinion in Oncology 2005; 17: 351-354
53. Jahng KH, Martin LR, Golin CE, Matteo MR Di. Preferences for medical collaboration: patient-physician congruence and patient outcomes. Patient Education and Counseling 2005; 57 (3): 308-314
54. Arora NK. Interacting with cancer patients: the significance of physicians' communication behavior. Social Science and Medicine 2003; 57 (5): 791-806
55. Zachariae R, Pedersen CG, Jensen AB, Ehrnrooth E, Rossen PB, Maase H von der. Association of perceived physician communication style with patient satisfaction, distress, cancer-related self-efficacy, and perceived control over the disease. British Journal of Cancer 2003; 88: 658-665
56. Franks P.Jerant AF, Fiscella K, Shields CG, Tancredi DJ, Epstein RM. Studying physician effects on patient outcomes: physician interactional style and performance on quality of care indicators. Social Science and Medicine 2006; 62 (2): 422-432
57. Michie S, Miles J, Weinman J. Patient-centredness in chronic illness: what is it and does it matter? Patient Education and Counseling 2003; 51: 197-206
58. Feldman-Stewart D, Brundage MD, Tishelman C. A conceptual framework for patient-professional communication: an application to the cancer context. Psychooncology 2005; 14 (10): 801-809
59. Epstein RM. Making communication research matter: what do patients notice, what do patients want, and what do patients need? Patient Education and Counseling 2006; 60 (3): 272-278
60. Safran DG, Miller W, Beckman H. Organizational dimensions of relationship-centered care. Theory, evidence, and practice. Journal of General Internal Medicine 2006; 21 (Suppl. 1): S9-S15
61. Jette AM. Toward a common language for function, disability, and health. Physical Therapy 2006; 86 (5): 726-734
62. Stucki G, Cieza A, Melvin J. The International Classification of Functioning, disability and health: a unifying model for the conceptual description of the rehabilitation strategy. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2007; 39: 279-285
63. Coenen M, Cieza A, Stamm TA, Amann E, Kollerits B, Stucki G. Validation of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) Core Set for rheumatoid arthritis from the patient perspective using focus groups. Arthritis Research & Therapy 2006; 8 (R84)
64. Stucki G, Grimby G. Foreword. Applying the ICF in medicine. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2004; (Suppl. 44): 5-6
65. Cieza A, Stucki G. Content comparison of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) instruments based on the international classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF). Quality of Life Research 2005; 14 (5): 1225-1237
66. Schuntermann MF. ICIDH und Assessments. Physikalische Medizin Rehabilitationsmedizin Kurortmedizin 2001 ; 11: 28-36
67. Reed GW, Lux JB, Bufka LF et al. Operationalizing the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health in clinical settings. Rehabilitation Psychology 2005; 50 (2): 122-131
68. Grill E, Mansmann U, Cieza A, Stucki G. Assessing observer agreement when describing and classifying functioning with the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2007; 39 (1): 71-76
69. Okochi J, Utsonomiya S, Takahashi T. Health measurement using the ICF: Test-retest reliability study of ICF codes and qualifiers in geriatric care. Health and Quality of Life Outcome 2005; 3 (1): 46
70. Cieza A, Brockow T, Ewert T et al. Linking health-status measurements to the international classification of functioning, disability and health. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2002; 34: 205-210
71. Haley SM, Siebens H, Coster WJ et al. Computerized adaptive testing for follow-up after discharge from inpatient rehabilitation: I. Activity outcomes. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2006; 87: 1033-1042
72. Meyer RR, Nering ML. Computerized adaptive testing: Overview and introduction. Applied Psychological Measurement 1999; 23 (3): 187-194
73. Wade DT, Halligan P. Editorial. New wine in old bottles: the WHO ICF as an explanatory model of human behaviour. Clinical Rehabilitation 2003; 17: 349-354
74. Kolen MJ, Brennan RL. Test equating, scaling, and linking. New York: Springer 2004
75. MacHorney CA, Cohen AS. Equating health status measures with item response theory. Illustrations with functional status items. Medical Care 2000; 38 (9 Suppl II): II-43-II-59
76. Haley SM, Coster WJ, Andres PL et al. Activity outcome measurement for postacute care. Medical Care 2004; 42: 1-49-1-61
77. Haley SM, Coster W, Andres PL, Kosinski M, Pengsheng N. Score comparability of short forms and computerized adaptive testing: simulation study with the activity measure for post-acute care. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2004; 85: 661-666
78. Farin E, Fleitz A, Follert P. Entwicklung eines ICF-orientierten Patien-tenfragebogens zur Erfassung von Mobilität und Selbstversorgung. Physikalische Medizin Rehabilitationsmedizin Kurortmedizin 2006; 16: 197-211
79. Farin E, Fleitz A, Frey C. Psychometric properties of an ICF-oriented, adaptive questionnaire for the assessment of mobility, self care and domestic life. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2007; 39 (7): 537-546
80. Schuntermann M. Grundsatzpapier der Rentenversicherung zur Internationalen Klassifikation der Funktionsfähigkeit, Behinderung und Gesundheit (ICF) der Weltgesundheitsorganisation (WHO). Deutsche Rentenversicherung 2003; (1-2): 52-59
81. Farin E, Fleitz A. The development of an ICF-oriented, adaptive physician assessment instrument of mobility, self care, and domestic life. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research 2008 (im Druck)
82. Jette AM, Haley SM. Contemporary measurement techniques for rehabilitation outcomes assessment. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2005; 37 (6): 339-345
83. Heinemann AW. Putting outcome measurement in context: A rehabilitation psychology perspective. Rehabilitation Psychology 2005; 50 (1): 6-14
84. Dekker J. Dallmeijer A, Lankhorst G. Clinimetrics in rehabilitation medicine: current issues in developing and applying measurement instruments, 1. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2005; 37 (4): 193-201
85. Hays RD, Morales LS, Reise SP. Item response theory and health outcomes measurement in the 21st century. Medical Care 2000; 38 (9 Suppl II): II-28-II-42
86. Hart DL, Mioduski JE, Werneke MW, Stratford PW. Simulated computerized adaptive test for patients with lumbar spine impairments was efficient and produced valid measures of function. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2006; 59 (9): 947-956
87. Dorons NJ, Kulick E. Differential item functioning on the Mini-Mental State Examination. An application of the Mantel-Haenszel and standardization procedures. Medical Care 2006; 44 (11): 107-114
88. Schwartz CE, Andresen EM, Nosek MA, Krahn GL. Response shift theory: Important implications for measuring quality of life in people with disability. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2007; 88: 529-536
89. Lohr K. Health Outcomes Methodology Symposium: Summary and recommendations. Medical Care 2000; 39 (9 Suppl. II): II-194-II-208
90. Jette AM, Tao W, Norweg A, Haley S. Interpreting rehabilitation outcome measurements. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2007; 39 (8): 585-590
91. Elliott D, Lazarus R, Leeder S. Proxy respondents reliably assessed the quality of life of elective cardiac surgery patients. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2006; 59: 153-159
92. MacIntyre A, Tempest S. Two steps forward, one step back? A commentary on the disease-specific core sets of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Disability & Rehabilitation 2007; 29 (18): 1475-1479