Literature DB >> 10206348

Handicap questionnaires: what do they assess?

M Cardol1, J W Brandsma, I J de Groot, G A van den Bos, R J de Haan, B A de Jong.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: There is an increasing need to get insight into the social and societal impact of chronic conditions on a person's life, i.e. person-perceived handicap. The purpose of this study is to report how current handicap questionnaires assess handicap.
METHOD: A literature search using both Medline and the database of the Dutch Institute of Allied Health Professions (NPi) was conducted for handicap questionnaires. Questionnaires were included if addressing handicaps or life roles, environmental influences and social consequences of a disease. Excluded were questionnaires focusing on only impairments, disabilities or quality of life. RESULTS AND
CONCLUSION: 20 questionnaires were identified. Handicap is not uniformly defined in these questionnaires. Based on different concepts, the various questionnaires encompass different domains and different aspects are emphasized in similar domains. Fourteen questionnaires assess society-perceived handicaps, and do not address the life roles, care needs or individual problem-experience. Six questionnaires are to some extent person-perceived, but a generic person-perceived handicap questionnaire could not be identified. It is concluded that development of a generic person-perceived handicap questionnaire is essential for adequate assessment of needs, outcome, and relevance of rehabilitation interventions from the individual's point of view.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10206348     DOI: 10.1080/096382899297819

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Disabil Rehabil        ISSN: 0963-8288            Impact factor:   3.033


  10 in total

Review 1.  Recent advances in rehabilitation.

Authors:  D T Wade; B A de Jong
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-05-20

2.  Measuring communicative participation: a review of self-report instruments in speech-language pathology.

Authors:  Tanya L Eadie; Kathryn M Yorkston; Estelle R Klasner; Brian J Dudgeon; Jean C Deitz; Carolyn R Baylor; Robert M Miller; Dagmar Amtmann
Journal:  Am J Speech Lang Pathol       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 2.408

3.  Measuring participation in people living with multiple sclerosis: a comparison of self-reported frequency, importance and self-efficacy.

Authors:  Kathryn M Yorkston; Carrie M Kuehn; Kurt L Johnson; Dawn M Ehde; Mark P Jensen; Dagmar Amtmann
Journal:  Disabil Rehabil       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 3.033

4.  Are the Domains Considered by ICF Comprehensive Enough to Conceptualize Participation in the Patient with Hand Injuries?

Authors:  Maryam Farzad; Fereydoun Layeghi; Seyyed Ali Hosseini; Khanke Hamidreza; Ali Asgari
Journal:  J Hand Microsurg       Date:  2017-11-29

5.  Measuring community integration after spinal cord injury: validation of the Sydney psychosocial reintegration scale and community integration measure.

Authors:  Annelies De Wolf; Amanda Lane-Brown; Robyn L Tate; James Middleton; Ian D Cameron
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-06-27       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Participation following traumatic spinal cord injury: an evidence-based review for research.

Authors:  Susan R Magasi; Allen W Heinemann; Gale G Whiteneck
Journal:  J Spinal Cord Med       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 1.985

7.  Developing the communicative participation item bank: Rasch analysis results from a spasmodic dysphonia sample.

Authors:  Carolyn R Baylor; Kathryn M Yorkston; Tanya L Eadie; Robert M Miller; Dagmar Amtmann
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2009-08-28       Impact factor: 2.297

8.  Health and role functioning: the use of focus groups in the development of an item bank.

Authors:  Milena D Anatchkova; Jakob B Bjorner
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-01-03       Impact factor: 4.147

9.  Development and psychometric properties of the Carer - Head Injury Neurobehavioral Assessment Scale (C-HINAS) and the Carer - Head Injury Participation Scale (C-HIPS): patient and family determined outcome scales.

Authors:  Shoumitro Deb; Eleanor Bryant; Paul G Morris; Lindsay Prior; Glyn Lewis; Sayeed Haque
Journal:  Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 2.570

10.  Rasch analysis of the London Handicap Scale in stroke patients: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Eun-Young Park; Yoo-Im Choi
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2014-07-31       Impact factor: 4.262

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.