Evaluating domains of everyday functioning in people with developmental disabilities

Abstract

Objective: To examine the relationship among (a) quality of activities of daily living (ADL) task performance, (b) quality of social interaction, and (c) the extent of discrepancy between the person’s and the occupational therapist’s perspectives; and explore patterns of strengths and challenges among people with developmental disabilities (DD). Methods: Fifty-eight adults with different types of DD, living in northern Sweden, were evaluated using the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (AMPS), the Evaluation of Social Interaction (ESI) and the Assessment of Compared Qualities – Occupational Performance (ACQ-OP) and Assessment of Compared Qualities – Social Interaction (ACQ-SI). The relationships among assessments were analysed using Pearson correlation analyses. Cluster analysis was used to group participants based on their evaluation results. Results The quality of ADL task performance and the quality of social interaction demonstrated weak to moderate positive relationships while the ACQ-OP and ACQ-SI demonstrated a strong positive relationship. The cluster analysis resulted in identifying three distinct groups that differed significantly from one another. Conclusion: The findings support the clinical use of multiple assessment tools, including observation and self-report, to evaluate different aspects of occupational performance. Comprehensive and relevant evaluation supports collaborative goal setting and intervention planning.

Keywords:

• Activities of daily living
• observation
• occupational performance
• self-report
• social interaction

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to express their sincere appreciation of the seven occupational therapists who were the data collectors for this study. Their shared experiences and insights regarding the use of the evaluation tools further enriched our learning. This study was funded, in part, by the Swedish Research Councilãs Strategic Research Programme: Care Science, UmeË University.

Disclosure statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.

Notes

1 Post hoc Tukey tests revealed significant (p<.05) mean differences between cluster groups 1 and 2, but no significant difference between groups 1 and 3 or 2 and 3

2 Post hoc Tukey tests revealed significant (p<.05) mean differences between cluster groups 1 and 2 and 1 and 3, but no significant difference between groups 2 and 3

3 Post hoc Tukey tests revealed significant (p<.05) mean differences among all three cluster groups

4 Post hoc Tukey tests revealed a significant (p<.05) mean difference between cluster groups 1 and 2 and 1 and 3, but no significant difference between groups 2 and 3

5 Post hoc Tukey tests revealed a significant (p<.05) mean differences among all three cluster groups