B M Larkins1, L E Worrall, L M Hickson. 1. Department of Speech Pathology and Audiology, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. brigette@chch.planet.org.nz
Abstract
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To establish a process whereby assessment of functional communication reflects the authentic communication of the target population. The major functional communication assessments available from the USA may not be as relevant to those who reside elsewhere, nor assessments developed primarily for persons who have had a stroke as relevant for traumatic brain injury rehabilitation. RESEARCH DESIGN: The investigation used the Nominal Group Technique to elicit free opinion and support individuals who have compromised communication ability. A survey mailed out sampled a larger number of stakeholders to test out differences among groups. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Five stakeholder groups generated items and the survey determined relative 'importance'. The stakeholder groups in both studies comprised individuals with traumatic brain injury and their families, health professionals, third-party payers, employers, and Maori, the indigenous population of New Zealand. MAIN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference found between groups for 19 of the 31 items. Only half of the items explicitly appear on a well-known USA functional communication assessment. CONCLUSIONS: The present study has implications for whether functional communication assessments are valid across cultures and the type of impairment.
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To establish a process whereby assessment of functional communication reflects the authentic communication of the target population. The major functional communication assessments available from the USA may not be as relevant to those who reside elsewhere, nor assessments developed primarily for persons who have had a stroke as relevant for traumatic brain injury rehabilitation. RESEARCH DESIGN: The investigation used the Nominal Group Technique to elicit free opinion and support individuals who have compromised communication ability. A survey mailed out sampled a larger number of stakeholders to test out differences among groups. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Five stakeholder groups generated items and the survey determined relative 'importance'. The stakeholder groups in both studies comprised individuals with traumatic brain injury and their families, health professionals, third-party payers, employers, and Maori, the indigenous population of New Zealand. MAIN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference found between groups for 19 of the 31 items. Only half of the items explicitly appear on a well-known USA functional communication assessment. CONCLUSIONS: The present study has implications for whether functional communication assessments are valid across cultures and the type of impairment.
Authors: Laura E Dreer; Christopher A Girkin; Lisa Campbell; Andy Wood; Liyan Gao; Cynthia Owsley Journal: Optom Vis Sci Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 1.973
Authors: Therese M O'Neil-Pirozzi; Anthony H Lequerica; Nancy D Chiaravalloti; Shannon B Juengst; Jody K Newman Journal: J Head Trauma Rehabil Date: 2021 May-Jun 01 Impact factor: 3.117