Contemporary measurement techniques for rehabilitation outcomes assessment

被引:148
作者
Jette, AM [1 ]
Haley, SM [1 ]
机构
[1] Boston Univ, Hlth & Disabil Res Inst, Boston, MA 02215 USA
关键词
healthcare evaluation mechanisms; quality of healthcare; outcome assessment; questionnaire design;
D O I
10.1080/16501970500302793
中图分类号
R49 [康复医学];
学科分类号
100215 ;
摘要
In this article, we review the limitations of traditional rehabilitation functional outcome instruments currently in use within the rehabilitation field to assess Activity and Participation domains as defined by the International Classification of Function, Disability, and Health. These include a narrow scope of functional outcomes, data incompatibility across instruments, and the precision vs feasibility dilemma. Following this, we illustrate how contemporary measurement techniques, such as item response theory methods combined with computer adaptive testing methodology, can be applied in rehabilitation to design functional outcome instruments that are comprehensive in scope, accurate, allow for compatibility across instruments, and are sensitive to clinically important change without sacrificing their feasibility. Finally, we present some of the pressing challenges that need to be overcome to provide effective dissemination and training assistance to ensure that current and future generations of rehabilitation professionals are familiar with and skilled in the application of contemporary outcomes measurement.
引用
收藏
页码:339 / 345
页数:7
相关论文
共 44 条
  • [1] Andres Patricia L, 2004, Top Stroke Rehabil, V11, P33
  • [2] [Anonymous], PERCEPTIONS HLTH ILL
  • [3] [Anonymous], 1997, GUID UN DAT SET MED
  • [4] BJORNER JB, 1998, MONITOR APR, P12
  • [5] Delicate balance between theory and practice - Health status assessment and item response theory
    Cook, KF
    Monahan, PO
    McHorney, CA
    [J]. MEDICAL CARE, 2003, 41 (05) : 571 - 574
  • [6] COSTER W, UNPUB MEASURING PATI
  • [7] Embretson S. E., 2000, ITEM RESPONSE THEORY
  • [8] Knowledge dissemination and utilization in gerontology: An organizing framework
    Farkas, M
    Jette, AM
    Tennstedt, S
    Haley, SM
    Quinn, V
    [J]. GERONTOLOGIST, 2003, 43 : 47 - 56
  • [9] FUNCTIONAL MEASURES .1. WHAT IS FUNCTION, WHAT SHOULD WE MEASURE, AND HOW SHOULD WE MEASURE IT
    FISHER, AG
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY, 1992, 46 (02) : 183 - 185
  • [10] GANDEK B, UNPUB DEV INITIAL TE