Strategies for assessment and outcome measurement in physical and rehabilitation medicine: An educational review

Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine

Volumn 43, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 661-672

  Küçükdeveci, Ayşe A ^a   Tennant, Alan ^b   Grimby, Gunnar ^c   Franchignoni, Franco ^d  

^a ANKARA UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

^d IRCCS   (Italy)

Author keywords

ICF; Outcome assessment; Psychometrics; Rehabilitation

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL EDUCATION; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; DECISION MAKING; DISABILITY; EDUCATION; HUMAN; INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF DISEASES; METHODOLOGY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PHYSICAL MEDICINE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PSYCHOMETRY; QUALITY OF LIFE; REHABILITATION; REPRODUCIBILITY; REVIEW; RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS; STANDARD; STROKE;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; ARTHRITIS, RHEUMATOID; CLINICAL CLERKSHIP; DECISION MAKING; DISABILITY EVALUATION; HUMANS; INTERNATIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF DISEASES; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PHYSICAL MEDICINE; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUALITY OF LIFE; REHABILITATION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; STROKE;

EID: 79961171718     PISSN: 16501977     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2340/16501977-0844     Document Type: Review

References (100)

1. Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF): a unifying model for the conceptual description of the rehabilitation strategy. J Rehabil Med 2007; 39: 279-285.
2. Tesio L. Functional assessment in rehabilitative medicine: principles and methods. Eura Medicophys 2007; 43: 515-523.
3. Wade DT. Outcome measurement and rehabilitation. Clin Rehabil 1999; 13: 93-95. (Pubitemid 29171403)
4. World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.
5. Deiner E. Subjective well-being. Psychol Bull 1984; 95: 542-575.
6. Fuhrer MJ. Subjectifying quality of life as a medical rehabilitation outcome. Disabil Rehabil 2000; 22: 481-489. (Pubitemid 30639446)
7. McKenna SP, Doward LC. The needs-based approach to quality of life assessment. Value Health 2004; 7 Suppl 1: S1-S3. (Pubitemid 39390821)
8. Parker K, Kirby RL, Adderson J, Thompson K. Ambulation of people with lower-limb amputations: relationship between capacity and performance measures. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2010; 91: 543-549.
9. Holsbeeke L, Ketelaar M, Schoemaker MM, Gorter JW. Capacity, capability, and performance: different constructs or three of a kind? Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2009; 90: 849-855.
10. van den Berg-Emons RJ, Bussmann JB, Stam HJ. Accelerometrybased activity spectrum in persons with chronic physical conditions. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2010; 91: 1856-1861.
11. Haigh R, Tennant A, Biering-Sørensen F, Grimby G, Marinček C, Phillips S, et al. The use of outcome measures in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation within Europe. J Rehabil Med 2001: 33: 273-278. (Pubitemid 33103912)
12. Skinner A, Turner-Stokes L. The use of standardized outcome measures in rehabilitation centres in the U.K. Clin Rehabil 2006; 20: 609-615. (Pubitemid 44193034)
13. Noonan VK, Kopec JA, Noreau L, Singer J, Chan A, Masse LC, et al. Comparing the content of participation instruments using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2009; 7: 93.
14. Magasi S, Post MW. A comparative review of contemporary participation measures' psychometric properties and content cover- age. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2010; 91 Suppl 1: S17-S28.
15. Fugl-Meyer AR, Melin R, Fugl-Meyer KS. J Life satisfaction in 18- to 64-year-old Swedes: in relation to gender, age, partner and immigrant status. J Rehabil Med 2002; 34: 239-246.
16. Johnston MV, Miklos CS. Activity-related quality of life in rehabilitation and traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002; 83 Suppl 2: S26-S38. (Pubitemid 35424686)
17. Garratt A, Schmidt L, Mackintosh A, Fitzpatrick R. Quality of life measurement: bibliographic study of patient assessed health outcome measures. BMJ 2002; 324: 1417-1421.
18. Wade DT. Describing rehabilitation interventions. Clin Rehabil 2005; 19: 811-818.
19. Tyson S, Greenhalgh J, Long AF, Flynn R. The use of measurement tools in clinical practice: an observational study of neurorehabilitation. Clin Rehabil 2010; 24: 74-81.
20. Tyson S, Connell LA. How to measure balance in clinical practice. A systematic review of the psychometrics and clinical utility of measures of balance activity for neurological conditions. Clin Rehabil 2009; 23: 824-840.
21. Barak S, Duncan PW. Issues in selecting outcome measures to assess functional recovery after stroke. NeuroRx 2006; 3: 505-524. (Pubitemid 44443017)
22. National Health Service Review. Working Paper No 6 Medical Audit. London: HMSO; 1989.
23. National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE). Principles of best practice in clinical audit. Abingdon, UK: Radcliffe Medical Press; 2002.
24. Wikipedia.org [homepage on internet] San Francisco: Wikimedia Foundation Inc.; 2001 [updated 2010 June 8]. Clinical audit. Available from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinical-audit.
25. Granger CV, Black T, Braun SL. Quality and outcome measures for medical rehabilitation. In: Braddom RL, editor. Physical medicine and rehabilitation. China: Elsevier Inc.; 2007, p. 151-164.
26. Freeman JA, Hobart JC, Playford ED, Undy B, Thompson AJ. Evaluating neurorehabilitation: lessons from routine data collection. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2005; 76: 723-728. (Pubitemid 40569687)
27. Cadilhac DA, Pearce DC, Levi CR, Donnan GA; Greater Metropolitan Clinical Taskforce and New South Wales Stroke Services Coordinating Committee. Improvements in the quality of care and health outcomes with new stroke care units following implementation of a clinician-led, health system redesign programme in New South Wales, Australia. Qual Saf Health Care 2008; 17: 329-333.
28. Abilleira S, Gallofré M, Ribera A, Sánchez E, Tresserras R. Quality of in-hospital stroke care according to evidence-based performance measures: results from the first audit of stroke, Catalonia, Spain. Stroke 2009; 40: 1433-1438.
29. Schouten LM, Hulscher ME, Akkermans R, van Everdingen JJ, Grol RP, Huijsman R. Factors that influence the stroke care team's effectiveness in reducing the length of hospital stay. Stroke 2008; 39: 2515-2521.
30. Wade DT, Smeets RJ, Verbunt JA. Research in rehabilitation medicine: methodological challenges. J Clin Epidemiol 2010; 63: 699-704.
31. Bowen A, Lincoln NB. Cognitive rehabilitation for spatial neglect following stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007; 18: CD003586.
32. Ashford S, Slade M, Malaprade F, Turner-Stokes L. Evaluation of functional outcome measures for the hemiparetic upper limb: a systematic review. J Rehabil Med 2008; 40: 787-795.
33. Cigolle CT, Langa KM, Kabeto MU, Tian Z, Blaum CS. Geriatric conditions and disability: the Health and Retirement Study. Ann Intern Med 2007; 147: 156-164. (Pubitemid 351664595)
34. Holbrook TL, Anderson JP, Sieber WJ, Browner D, Hoyt DB. Outcome after major trauma: 12-month and 18-month follow-up results from the Trauma Recovery Project. J Trauma 1999; 46: 765-771.
35. Uhlig T, Finset A, Kvien TK. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of comprehensive rehabilitation programs. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2003, 15: 134-140. (Pubitemid 36250294)
36. Cimera RE, Rumrill PD. Economic analyses of rehabilitation services as research methodologies. Work 2008; 31: 483-487.
37. Brady BK, McGahan L, Skidmore B. Systematic review of economic evidence on stroke rehabilitation services. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2005; 21: 15-21. (Pubitemid 40229364)
38. Turner-Stokes L. Politics, policy and payment - facilitators or barriers to person-centred rehabilitation? Disabil Rehabil 2007; 29: 1575-1582.
39. Räsänen P, Roine E, Sintonen H, Semberg-Konttinen V, Ryynänen OP, Roine R. Use of quality-adjusted life years for the estimation of effectiveness of health care: A systematic literature review. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2006; 22: 235-241.
40. Scheuringer M, Stucki G, Huber EO, Brach M, Schwarzkopf S, Kostanjsek N, et al. ICF Core Set for patients with musculoskeletal conditions in early post-acute rehabilitation facilities. Disabil Rehabil 2005; 27: 405-410. (Pubitemid 40711870)
41. Stier-Jarmer M, Grill E, Ewert T, Bartholomeyczik S, Finger M, Mokrusch T, et al. ICF Core Set for patients with neurological conditions in early post-acute rehabilitation facilities. Disabil Rehabil 2005; 27: 389-395. (Pubitemid 40711868)
42. Bullinger M, Azouvi P, Brooks N, Basso A, Christensen AL, Gobiet W et al; TBI Consensus Group. Quality of life in patients with traumatic brain injury-basic issues, assessment and recommendations. Restor Neurol Neurosci 2002; 20: 111-124. (Pubitemid 35404345)
43. Furlan JC, Noonan V, Singh A, Fehlings MG. Assessment of impairment in patients with acute traumatic spinal cord injury: a systematic review of the literature. J Neurotrauma 2010 Apr 6. [Epub ahead of print].
44. Dawson J, Shamley D, Jamous MA. A structured review of outcome measures used for the assessment of rehabilitation interventions for spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 2008; 46: 768-780.
45. Dekker J, Dallmeijer AJ, Lankhorst GJ. Clinimetrics in rehabilitation medicine: current issues in developing and applying measurement instruments. J Rehabil Med 2005; 37: 193-201. (Pubitemid 41025326)
46. Brooks P, Hochberg M. Outcome measures and classification criteria for the rheumatic diseases. A compilation of data from OMERACT (Outcome Measures for Arthritis Clinical Trials), ILAR (International League of Associations for Rheumatology), regional leagues and other groups. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2001; 40: 896-906.
47. Boers M, Tugwell P, Felson DT, van Riel PL, Kirwan JR, Edmonds JP, et al. World Health Organization and International League of Associations for Rheumatology core endpoints for symptom modifying antirheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. J Rheumatol 1994; 21 Suppl 41: S86-S89.
48. van der Heijde D, Bellamy N, Calin A, Dougados M, Khan MA, van der Linden S. Preliminary core sets for endpoints in ankylosing spondylitis. J Rheumatol 1997; 24: 2225-2229. (Pubitemid 27474048)
49. Stucki G, Grimby G. Applying the ICF in medicine. J Rehabil Med 2004; Suppl 44: 5-6.
50. Stucki G, Kostanjsek N, Ustun TB, Cieza A. ICF-based classification and measurement of functioning. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2008; 44: 315-328.
51. Okochi J, Utsunomiya S, Takahashi T. Health measurement using the ICF: test-retest reliability study of ICF codes and qualifiers in geriatric care. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2005; 3: 46.
52. Bautz-Holter E, Sveen U, Cieza A, Geyh S, Røe C. Does the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) core set for low back pain cover the patients' problems? A cross-sectional content-validity study with a Norwegian population. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med 2008; 44: 387-397.
53. Uhlig T, Lillemo S, Moe RH, Stamm T, Cieza A, Boonen A, et al. Reliability of the ICF Core Set for rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2007; 66: 1078-1084. (Pubitemid 47122323)
54. Cieza A, Hilfiker R, Boonen A, Chatterji S, Kostanjsek N, Ustün BT, Stucki G. Items from patient-oriented instruments can be integrated into interval scales to operationalize categories of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. J Clin Epidemiol 2009; 62: 912-921.
55. Torenbeek M, Caulfield B, Garrett M, Van Harten W. Current use of outcome measures for stroke and low back pain rehabilitation in five European countries: first results of the ACROSS project. Int J Rehabil Res 2001; 24: 95-101. (Pubitemid 32531170)
56. Douglas H, Swanson C, Gee T, Bellamy N. Outcome measurement in Australian rehabilitation environments. J Rehabil Med 2005; 3: 325-329. (Pubitemid 41341638)
57. Barat M, Franchignoni F, editors. Assessment in physical medicine and rehabilitation. Pavia: PI-ME - Maugeri Foundation Books; 2004.
58. Bowling A. Measuring health. A review of quality of life measurement scales, 3rd edition. Buckingham: Open University Press; 2004.
59. Herndon RN. The Handbook of Neurologic Rating Scales, 2nd edition. NewYork, NY: Demos Medical Publishing; 2006.
60. McDowell I. Measuring health. A guide to rating scales and questionnaires, 3rd edition. New York: Oxford University Press; 2006.
61. Wade DT. Measurement in neurological rehabilitation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1992.
62. Schepers VP, Ketelaar M, van de Port IG, Visser-Meily JM, Lindeman E. Comparing contents of functional outcome measures in stroke rehabilitation using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Disabil Rehabil 2007; 29: 221-230. (Pubitemid 47179934)
63. Stucki G, Cieza A. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) Core Sets for rheumatoid arthritis: a way to specify functioning. Ann Rheum Dis 2004; 63 Suppl 2: ii40-ii45. (Pubitemid 39424657)
64. Frost MH, Reeve BB, Liepa AM, Stauffer JW, Hays RD. What is sufficient evidence for the reliability and validity of patient-reported outcome measures? Value Health 2007; 10 Suppl 2: S94-S105. (Pubitemid 350098926)
65. Rothman M, Burke L, Erickson P, Leidy NK, Patrick DL, Petrie CD. Use of existing patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments and their modification: the ISPOR good research practices for evaluating and documenting content validity for the use of existing instruments and their modification PRO Task Force report. Value Health 2009; 12: 1075-1083.
66. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol D, et al. The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study. Qual Life Res 2010; 19: 539-549.
67. Merbitz C, Morris J, Grip JC. Ordinal scales and foundations of misinference. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1989: 70: 308-312. (Pubitemid 19110574)
68. Svensson E. Guidelines to statistical evaluation of data from rating scales and questionnaires. J Rehabil Med 2001; 33: 47-48. (Pubitemid 32401161)
69. Rasch G. Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1960.
70. Tennant A, Conaghan PG. The Rasch measurement model in rheumatology: what is it and why use it? When should it be applied, and what should one look for in a Rasch paper? Arthritis Rheum 2007; 57: 1358-1362. (Pubitemid 350308830)
71. Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH. Psychometric theory, 3rd edition. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1994.
72. Fitzpatrick R, Davey C, Buxton MJ, Jones DR. Evaluating patientbased outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technol Assess 1998; 2: i-iv, 1-74.
73. Cook DA, Beckman TJ. Current concepts in validity and reliability for psychometric instruments: Theory and application. Am J Med 2006; 119: 166.e7-166.e16.
74. Johnston MV, Graves DE. Towards guidelines for evaluation of measures: an introduction with application to spinal cord injury. J Spinal Cord Med 2008; 31: 13-26. (Pubitemid 351838091)
75. Thurstone LL . Attitudes can be measured. Am J Sociol 1928; 33: 529-554.
76. Loevinger J. Objective tests as instruments of psychological theory. Psychol Rep 1957; 3, 635-694.
77. Bollen KA. Structural equations with latent variables. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1989.
78. Tennant A, McKenna SP, Hagell P. Application of Rasch analysis in the development and application of quality of life instruments. Value Health 2004; 7 Suppl 1: S22-S26. (Pubitemid 39390826)
79. Tesio L. Measuring behaviours and perceptions: Rasch analysis as a tool for rehabilitation research. J Rehabil Med 2003; 35: 105-115. (Pubitemid 36681702)
80. Gallagher P, Franchignoni F, Giordano A, MacLachlan M. Trinity amputation and prosthesis experience scales: a psychometric assessment using classical test theory and Rasch analysis. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2010; 89: 487-496.
81. Andrich D. Rating formulation for ordered response categories. Psychometrika 1978; 43: 561-573.
82. Masters G. A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika 1982; 47: 149-174.
83. Guttman L. The basis for scalogram analysis. In: Stouffer SA, Guttman L, Suchman EA, Lazarsfield PF, Star SA, Clausen JA, editors. Studies in social psychology in World War II: Vol 4. Measurement and prediction. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1950, p. 60-90.
84. Smith RM. Fit analysis in latent trait measurement models. J Applied Measurement 2000; 2: 199-218.
85. Tennant A, Penta M, Tesio L, Grimby G, Thonnard J-L, Slade A, et al. Assessing and adjusting for cross cultural validity of impairment and activity limitation scales through differential item functioning within the framework of the Rasch model: the Pro-ESOR project. Medical Care 2004; 42 Suppl 1: 37-48.
86. Holland PW, Wainer H. Differential item functioning. Hilldale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1993.
87. Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 1951; 16: 297-334.
88. Bland JM, Altman DG. Cronbach's alpha. BMJ 1997; 314: 572. (Pubitemid 27089377)
89. Smith GT. On construct validity: Issues of method and measurement. Psychol Assess 2005; 17: 396-408. (Pubitemid 43098485)
90. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales. A practical guide to their development and use. 3rd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2003.
91. Crosby RD, Kolotkin RL, Williams GR. Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 2003; 56: 395-407. (Pubitemid 36694091)
92. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988.
93. Beckerman H, Roebroeck ME, Lankhorst GJ, Becher JG, Bezemer PD, Verbeek AL. Smallest real difference, a link between reproducibility and responsiveness. Qual Life Res 2001; 10: 571-578. (Pubitemid 34056327)
94. Kersten P, White PJ, Tennant A. The visual analogue WOMAC 3.0 scale - internal validity and responsiveness of the VAS version. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 2010; 11: 80.
95. Wolf FM. Meta analysis. Qualitative applications in the social sciences 59. Newbury Park California: Sage; 1986.
96. Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 1989; 10: 407-415. (Pubitemid 20025670)
97. Hobart J, Stefan C, Thompson AJ. Effect sizes can be misleading: is it time to change the way we measure change? J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2010; 81: 1044-1048.
98. Haley S, Ni P, Hambleton R, Slavin M, Jette A. Computer adaptive testing improves accuracy and precision of scores over random item selection in a physical functioning item bank. J Clin Epidemiol 2006; 59: 1174-1182. (Pubitemid 44515048)
99. Bjorner JB Chang C-H, Thissen D, Reeve BB. Developing tailored instruments: item banking and computerized adaptive assessment. Qual Life Res 2007; 16: 95-108. (Pubitemid 47036912)
100. Elhan AH, Oztuna D, Kutlay S, Küçükdeveci AA, Tennant A. An initial application of computerized adaptive testing (CAT) for measuring disability in patients with low back pain. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2008; 9: 166.