| Literature DB >> 28587271 |
Chia-Feng Yen1, Tzu-Ying Chiu2, Tsan-Hon Liou3,4,5, Wen-Chou Chi6, Hua-Fang Liao7, Chung-Chao Liang8,9, Reuben Escorpizo10,11.
Abstract
Based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) and the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0), The Functioning Disability Evaluation Scale-Adult version (FUNDES-Adult) began development in 2011. The FUNDES-Adult was designed to assess the difficulty level of an individual's activities and participation in daily life. There is a lack of research regarding the profile of activity and participation for the general adult population. The purposes of this study were to establish activity and participation norms for the general adult population in Taiwan and to describe, discuss, and compare the activity and participation profile with other population.Entities:
Keywords: WHODAS 2.0; activity and participation; disability; functioning; norms
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28587271 PMCID: PMC5486289 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph14060603
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Comparison of demographic characteristics between the weighted sample and the Taiwan adult population.
| Variable | Sample | Weighted Sample | Taiwan Adult Population | Chi-Square Value ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| % | % | % | 0.014 (0.91) | |||
| Male | 583 | 38.7 | 748 | 49.7 | 49.5 | |
| Female | 922 | 61.3 | 758 | 50.3 | 50.5 | |
| 0.623 (1.00) | ||||||
| 18–19 | 25 | 1.7 | 48 | 3.2 | 3.4 | |
| 20–29 | 150 | 10.1 | 258 | 17.3 | 17.2 | |
| 30–39 | 244 | 16.4 | 310 | 20.8 | 20.6 | |
| 40–49 | 297 | 20.0 | 288 | 19.4 | 19.3 | |
| 50–59 | 385 | 25.9 | 275 | 18.5 | 18.5 | |
| 60–64 | 166 | 11.2 | 106 | 7.1 | 7.1 | |
| 65–69 | 96 | 6.5 | 60 | 4.1 | 4.1 | |
| 70–74 | 67 | 4.5 | 54 | 3.6 | 3.6 | |
| 75–79 | 35 | 2.4 | 38 | 2.6 | 2.7 | |
| 80–84 | 15 | 1.0 | 27 | 1.8 | 2.0 | |
| ≥85 | 4 | 0.3 | 24 | 1.6 | 1.5 | |
| 0.1 (1.00) | ||||||
| Northern | 633 | 42.2 | 665 | 44.3 | 44.7 | |
| Central | 460 | 30.7 | 369 | 24.6 | 24.5 | |
| Southern | 363 | 24.2 | 414 | 27.6 | 27.4 | |
| Eastern | 35 | 2.4 | 37 | 2.4 | 2.4 | |
| Islands | 8 | 0.5 | 16 | 1.1 | 1 | |
| 8.134 (0.004) | ||||||
| Yes | 49 | 3.3 | 50 | 3.3 | 4.81 ψ | |
| No | 1456 | 96.7 | 1457 | 96.7 | 95.19 | |
ψ 2013 Taiwan statistics.
Demographic characteristics of the weighted sample.
| Variable | % | |
|---|---|---|
| Married | 1024 | 68.0 |
| Single | 430 | 28.5 |
| Divorced | 15 | 1.0 |
| Separated | 18 | 1.2 |
| Widowed | 19 | 1.3 |
| Illiterate | 32 | 2.1 |
| Elementary | 138 | 9.2 |
| Junior high | 148 | 9.9 |
| Senior high | 408 | 27.2 |
| Junior college | 203 | 13.5 |
| University | 460 | 30.7 |
| Graduate school | 112 | 7.4 |
| Intellectual | 2 | 4.9 |
| Chronic psychosis | 10 | 24.4 |
| Epilepsy | 1 | 2.4 |
| Vision | 1 | 2.4 |
| Hearing | 2 | 4.9 |
| Balance | 2 | 4.9 |
| Loss of functions of primary organs | 4 | 9.8 |
| Physical | 19 | 46.3 |
| Mild | 16 | 33.6 |
| Moderate | 24 | 52.1 |
| Severe | 5 | 11.2 |
| Profound | 1 | 3.1 |
| No | 1480 | 98.2 |
| Yes | 27 | 1.8 |
| No | 1454 | 96.6 |
| Yes | 51 | 3.4 |
Mean activity and participation scores of the weighted sample.
| Dimension and Domain | Domain Score Mean ± SD | Median | Range | Missing (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Do1. Cognition | 5.9 ± 11.6 | 0.0 | 0.0~95.0 | 0 |
| Do2. Mobility | 3.4 ± 10.7 | 0.0 | 0.0~100.0 | 0 |
| Do3. Self-care | 0.6 ± 4.7 | 0.0 | 0.0~90.0 | 0 |
| Do4. Getting along | 3.5 ± 9.8 | 0.0 | 0.0~100.0 | 0 |
| Do5-1. Household | 3.6 ± 13.4 | 0.0 | 0.0~100.0 | 0 |
| Do5-2. Work/ school task ( | 1.9 ± 7.7 | 0.0 | 0.0~100.0 | 490 (32.5) |
| Do6. Participation | 15.2 ± 16.0 | 12.5 | 0.0~100.0 | 0 |
| Total Summary Score | 6.4 ± 8.6 | 3.8 | 0.0~82.6 | 490 (32.5) |
| Do1. Cognition | 5.9 ± 11.7 | 0.0 | 0.0~95.0 | 0 |
| Do2. Mobility | 4.0 ± 13.6 | 0.0 | 0.0~100.0 | 0 |
| Do3. Self-care | 0.9 ± 6.7 | 0.0 | 0.0~100.0 | 0 |
| Do4. Getting along | 3.8 ± 10.7 | 0.0 | 0.0~100.0 | 0 |
| Do5-1. Household | 4.1 ± 14.9 | 0.0 | 0.0~100.0 | 0 |
| Do5-2. Work/school task ( | 2.1 ± 8.6 | 0.0 | 0.0~100.0 | 490 (32.5) |
| Do6. Participation | 15.5 ± 16.8 | 12.5 | 0.0~100.0 | 0 |
| Total Summary Score | 6.7 ± 10.0 | 3.8 | 0.0~91.3 | 490 (32.5) |
Figure 1Cumulative frequency curve of the total summary score in the capability and performance dimensions and the WHODAS 2.0 summary total score. Y-axis: cumulative population percentile; X-axis: total summary score. Reference: WHODAS 2.0 total summary score [19].
A comparison of the activity and participation norms between the general population and adults with disabilities in Taiwan.
| Percentile | Present Study | People with Disabilities [ | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | Capability | Performance | Capability | |
| 25 | 0.94 | 0.94 | 23.58 | 26.42 |
| 50 | 3.77 | 3.77 | 40.57 | 45.28 |
| 75 | 8.49 | 8.49 | 61.32 | 69.81 |
The percentile score of the total summary score of the WHODAS 2.0 world norm (performance) and two Taiwanese samples, the general population and people with disabilities (capability and performance dimensions).
| Percentile | WHODAS 2.0 World Norm | Taiwan General Population | People with Disabilities in Taiwan [ | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Performance | Performance | Capability | Performance | Capability | |
| 40 | 0 | 2.8 | 2.8 | 33.7 | 37.7 |
| 46.83 | 1 | 3.8 | 3.8 | 38.0 | 42.5 |
| 52.08 | 2 | 3.8 | 3.8 | 41.5 | 47.2 |
| 56.2 | 3 | 4.7 | 4.7 | 44.6 | 50.9 |
| 59.58 | 4 | 4.9 | 5.4 | 47.2 | 53.8 |
| 62.46 | 5 | 5.7 | 5.7 | 50.0 | 56.6 |
| 64.94 | 6 | 6.5 | 6.5 | 51.9 | 59.4 |
| 67.12 | 7 | 6.6 | 6.6 | 53.8 | 61.3 |
| 69.05 | 8 | 6.6 | 6.6 | 55.7 | 63.2 |
| 70.78 | 9 | 7.5 | 7.5 | 57.5 | 65.2 |
| 72.35 | 10 | 7.5 | 7.5 | 58.7 | 67.4 |
| 78.42 | 15 | 9.4 | 9.4 | 65.2 | 74.5 |
| 82.66 | 20 | 10.9 | 10.9 | 70.8 | 80.2 |
| 85.85 | 25 | 12.3 | 12.3 | 75.5 | 84.8 |
| 88.35 | 30 | 14.1 | 14.1 | 79.2 | 87.7 |
| 90.38 | 35 | 15.2 | 15.2 | 83.0 | 90.6 |
| 94.69 | 50 | 21.7 | 21.7 | 91.3 | 96.2 |
| 98.14 | 70 | 35.9 | 38 | 99.1 | 100.0 |
| 99.9 | 90 | 81 | 90.8 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
| 100 | 100 | 82.6 | 91.3 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
Figure 2The curves of the functioning scores of the six domains for adults. Population norms for IRT-base scoring of the WHODAS 2.0.