OBJECTIVE: The responsiveness of a new participation measure, the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation-Participation (USER-Participation) was compared with that of the Impact on Particpation and Autonomy (IPA). Furthermore, the concurrent validity of these two measures was assessed. METHOD: Participants were patients with brain injury or neuromuscular disease, who received occupational therapy as part of a multidisciplinary outpatient rehabilitation programme. They completed the IPA and the USER-Participation at the start and end of the programme, and at three-month follow-up. Responsiveness was analysed using the effect size (ES) and the standardized response mean (SRM). RESULTS: Responsiveness figures were small to moderate (-0.4 to 0.5) and similar for the IPA and the USER-Participation. The USER-Participation showed a consistent result, with Frequency scores declining and Restriction and Satisfaction scores inclining over time, and the IPA showed mixed results, with the different domain scores both inclining and declining over time. Correlations between IPA and USER-Participation scales were all significant, but by far strongest for the USER-Participation Satisfaction scale (-0.64 to -0.81). CONCLUSION: The USER-Participation was at least as responsive as the IPA. Further, satisfaction with participation as measured with the USER-Participation is highly similar to the concept of autonomy in participation as measured with the IPA.
OBJECTIVE: The responsiveness of a new participation measure, the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation-Participation (USER-Participation) was compared with that of the Impact on Particpation and Autonomy (IPA). Furthermore, the concurrent validity of these two measures was assessed. METHOD:Participants were patients with brain injury or neuromuscular disease, who received occupational therapy as part of a multidisciplinary outpatient rehabilitation programme. They completed the IPA and the USER-Participation at the start and end of the programme, and at three-month follow-up. Responsiveness was analysed using the effect size (ES) and the standardized response mean (SRM). RESULTS: Responsiveness figures were small to moderate (-0.4 to 0.5) and similar for the IPA and the USER-Participation. The USER-Participation showed a consistent result, with Frequency scores declining and Restriction and Satisfaction scores inclining over time, and the IPA showed mixed results, with the different domain scores both inclining and declining over time. Correlations between IPA and USER-Participation scales were all significant, but by far strongest for the USER-Participation Satisfaction scale (-0.64 to -0.81). CONCLUSION: The USER-Participation was at least as responsive as the IPA. Further, satisfaction with participation as measured with the USER-Participation is highly similar to the concept of autonomy in participation as measured with the IPA.
Authors: Annemarie Wagemakers; Lisanne S Mulderij; Kirsten T Verkooijen; Stef Groenewoud; Maria A Koelen Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2018-06-28 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Jos P L Slenders; Daan P J Verberne; Johanna M A Visser-Meily; Renske M Van den Berg-Vos; Vincent I H Kwa; Caroline M van Heugten Journal: J Neurol Date: 2020-06-24 Impact factor: 4.849
Authors: Rob A De Bie; Arie C Verburg; Carla Agasi-Idenburg; Edith H C Cup; Carolien Dekker; Johanna M Van Dongen; Edwin Geleijn; Marissa H G Gerards; Maud Graff; Ron Van Heerde; Hanneke Kalf; Marly Kammerer; Renée A Kool; Anja De Kruif; Hinke M Kruizenga; Marike Van der Leeden; Ton A F Lenssen; Willemijn M Meijer; Raymond Ostelo; Amber Ronteltap; Marike Van der Schaaf; Sonja Van Oers; Marian A E De van der Schueren; Anne I Slotegraaf; Cindy Veenhof; Thomas J Hoogeboom; Philip Van der Wees Journal: J Rehabil Med Date: 2022-08-26 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Andreia Maria Novo Lima; Maria Manuela Ferreira da Silva Martins; Maria Salomé Martins Ferreira; Carla Sílvia Fernandes; Soraia Dornelles Schoeller; Vítor Sérgio Oliveira Parola Journal: Porto Biomed J Date: 2022-09-09