A patient-prioritized ability assessment in haemophilia: The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure

Haemophilia

Volumn 17, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 605-611

  Padankatti, S M ^a   Macaden, A S ^a   Cherian, S M ^a   Thirumugam, M ^a   Pazani, D ^a   Kalaiselvan, M ^a   John, J A ^a   Subbian, E ^a   Prakash, H ^a   Poonnoose, P M ^a   Kavitha, M L ^a   Devadarasini, M ^a   Viswabandya, A ^a   Mathews, V ^a   Srivastava, A ^a  

^a CHRISTIAN MEDICAL COLLEGE   (India)

Author keywords

Disability; Haemophilia; Outcomes; Patient prioritized

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; CANADIAN OCCUPATIONAL PERFORMANCE MEASURE; CHILD; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISABILITY; HEMOPHILIA; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MUSCULOSKELETAL FUNCTION; OPEN ENDED QUESTIONNAIRE; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; CHILD; DISABILITY EVALUATION; HEMOPHILIA A; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; MUSCULOSKELETAL SYSTEM; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; QUESTIONNAIRES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 79959510789     PISSN: 13518216     EISSN: 13652516     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2516.2010.02465.x     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Pettersson H, Ahlberg A, Nilsson I. A Radiologic classification of hemophilic arthropathy. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1980; 149: 153-9.
2. Fischer K, Van Der Bom J, Molho P et al. Prophylactic Versus on-demand treatment strategies for severe hemophilia A comparison of costs and long term outcome. Haemophilia 2002; 8: 745-52.
3. Poonoose P, Srivastava A. Functional Assessment of Arthropathy - An International perspective. Semin Hematol 2006; 43: S27-S32.
4. Hilliard P, Funk S, Zourikian N et al. Hemophilia joint health score reliability study. Haemophilia 2006; 12: 518-25.
5. Poonnoose PM, Thomas R, Keshava SN et al. Psychometric analysis of the functional Independence Score in Haemophilia. Haemophilia 2007; 13: 620-6.
6. Beeton K, De Kleijin P, Hillard P, Funk S, Zourikan N, Bergstrom B. Recent developments in clinimetric instruments. Haemophilia 2006; 12: 102-7.
7. WHO. ICF - introduction, the International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health 2001, Geneva, Switzerland. Available at. Accessed May 30, 2007.
8. Van Genderen F, Van Meeteren N, Van Der Bom J. Functional consequences of haemophilia in adults: the development of the Haemophilia Activities List. Haemophilia 2004; 10: 565-71.
9. Poonnoose PM, Manigandan C, Thomas R et al. Functional Independence Score in Haemophilia: a new performance based instrument to measure disability. Haemophilia 2005; 11: 1-5.
10. McColl MA, Paterson M, Davies D, Doubt L, Law M. Validity and community utility of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. Can J Occup Therapy 2000; 67: 22-30.
11. Donnelly C, Eng J, Hall J et al. Client- centered assessment and the identification of meaningful treatment goals for individuals with a spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 2004; 42: 302-7.
12. Law M, Baptiste S, Carswell A. Canadian Occupational Performance Measure, 3rd edn. Ottawa, ON: CAOT Publication ACE., 1998.
13. Ripat J, Etcheverry E, Cooper J, Tate RB. The comparison of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure and the Health Assessment Questionnaire. Can J Occup Ther 2001; 64: 247.
14. Kjeken I, Dagfinrud H, Uhlig T. Reliability of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. J Rheumatol 2005; 32: 1503-9.
15. Carpenter L, Baker G, Tyldesley B. The use of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure as an outcome of a pain management program. Can J Occup Ther 2001; 68: 16-22.
16. ICIDH-2: International Classification of Functioning and Disability. Beta-2 draft, full version. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1999.
17. Beeton K, Neal D, Lee C. An exploration of health related quality of life in adults with haemophilia - a qualitative perspective. Haemophilia 2005; 11: 123-32.
18. Reynolds F. The Subjective Experience of Illness in Physiotherapy - A Psychosocial Approach, 3rd edition. Oxford: Butterworth Heinmann, 2004.
19. Northen J, Rust D, Nelson C, Watts J. Involvement of adult rehabilitation patients in setting occupational therapy goals. Am J Occup Ther 1995; 49: 214-20.
20. Donnelly C, Carswell A. Individualised outcome measures: a review of the literature. Can J Occup Ther 2002; 69: 84-94.