Development of a fidelity measure for community integration programmes for people with acquired brain injury

References

• Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Defining acquired brain injury. Canberra: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare; 1999
   Google Scholar
• Brain injury Australia. Policy paper: Falls related traumatic brain injury. Sydney: Brain injury Australia; 1999
   Google Scholar
• Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). Disability in Australia: acquired brain injury. Canbera: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare; 2007
   Google Scholar
• Umphred DA. Neurological rehabilitation. 5th ed. Toronto: Mosby; 2007
   Google Scholar
• Carling PJ. Return to community: building support systems for people with psychiatric disabilities. New York, NY: The Guilford Press; 1995
   Google Scholar
• United Nations General Assembly. Principles of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. United Nations, Geneva. 2006
   Google Scholar
• Gordon WA, Brown M, Bergman AI, Shields RW. Community integration research: an empowerment paradigm. In: Hagglund KJ, Heinemann AW, editors. Handbook of applied disability and rehabilitation research. New York: Springer; 2006
   Google Scholar
• McColl M, Carlson P, Johnston J, Minnes P, Shue K, Davies D, Karlovits T. The definition of community integration: perspectives of people with brain injuries. Brain Injury 1998;12:15–30
   Google Scholar
• Wong YI, Solomon PL. Community integration of persons with psychiatric disabilities in supportive independent housing: a conceptual model and methodological considerations. Mental Health Services Research 2002;4:13–28
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Willer BS, Rosenthal M, Kreutzer J, Gordon W, Rempel R. Assessment of the community integration following rehabilitation for traumatic brain injury. The Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation 1993;8:75–87
   Google Scholar
• Sander AM, Clark A, Pappadis MR. What Is community integration anyway?: Defining meaning following traumatic brain injury. The Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation 2010;25:121–127
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs HE, editor. Behavior analysis guidelines and brain injury rehabilitation: people, principles, and programs. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen Publishers; 1993
   Google Scholar
• Parvaneh S, Cocks E. Framework for describing community integration for people with acquired brain injury. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal 2012;59:131–137
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geurtsen GJ, Heugten CM, Martina JD, Geurts ACH. Comprehensive rehabilitation programs in the chronic phase after severe brain injury: a systematic review. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2010;42:97–110
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cicerone KD. Participation after multidisciplinary rehabilitation for moderate to severe traumatic brain injury in adults. Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation 2013;94:1421–1423
   Google Scholar
• Cicerone KD, Langenbahn DM, Braden C, Malec JF, Kalmar K, Fraas M, Felicetti T, Laatsch L, Harley JP, Bergquist T, et al. Evidence-based cognitive rehabilitation: updated review of the literature from 2003 through 2008. Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation 2011;92:519–530
   Google Scholar
• Lemaire GS, Mallik K. Barriers to community integration for participants in community-based psychiatric rehabilitation. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing 2005;19:125–132
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mills SC, Ragan TJ. A tool for analyzing implementation fidelity of an integrated learning system (ILS). Educational Technology Research and Development 2000;48:21–41
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mowbray CT, Holter MC, Teague GB, Bybee D. Fidelity criteria: development, measurement, and validation. American Journal of Evaluation 2003;24:315–327
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hohmann AA, Shear MK. Community-based intervention research: coping with the “noise” of real life in study design. The American Journal of Psychiatry 2002;159:201–207
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dane AV, Schneider BH. Program integrity in primary and early secondary prevention: are implementation effects out of control? Clinical Psychology Review 1998;18:23–45
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salyers MP, Bond GR, Teague GB, Cox JF, Smith ME, Hicks ML, Koop JI. Is it ACT yet? Real-world examples of evaluating the degree of implementation for assertive community treatment. The Journal of Behavioral Health Services and Research 2003;30:304–320
   Google Scholar
• Wilde EA, Whiteneck GG, Bogner J, Bushnik T, Cifu DX, Dikmen S, French L, Giacino JT, Hart T, Malec JF, et al. Recommendations for the use of common outcome measures in traumatic brain injury research. Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation 2010;91:1650–1660.e17
   Google Scholar
• Kuipers P, Kendall M, Fleming J, Tate R. Comparison of the Sydney Psychosocial Reintegration Scale (SPRS) with the Community Integration Questionnaire (CIQ): psychometric properties. Brain Injury 2004;18:161–177
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyttle A. Measures that lead to successful community integration following severe traumatic brain injury. 2008. Retrieved on Oct 2014 from: http://www.nzaot.com/downloads/contribute/BrainInjuryCommunityIntegrationAL.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Corrigan JD, Bogner J. Latent factors in measures of rehabilitation outcomes after traumatic brain injury. The Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation 2004;19:445–458
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reistetter TA, Beatriz CA. Appraising evidence on community integration following brain injury: a systematic review. Occupational Therapy International 2005;12:196–217
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Salter K, Foley N, Jutai J, Bayley M, Teasell R. Assessment of community integration following traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury 2008;22:820–835
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whiteneck GG, Charlifue SW, Gerhart KA, Overholser JD, Richardson GN. Quantifying handicap: a new measure of long-term rehabilitation outcomes. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 1992;73:519–526
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malec JF, Lezak MD. Manual for Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory. 2008. Available online at: http//www.tbims.org/combi/mpai, accessed November 2010
   Google Scholar
• Oddson B, Rumney P, Johnson P, Thomas-Stonell N. Clinical use of the Mayo-Portland Adaptability Inventory in rehabilitation after paediatric acquired brain injury. Dev.Med.Child Neurol 2006;48:918–922
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rappaport M, Hall KM, Hopkins HK, Blelleza T, Cpoe DN. Disability rating scale for severe head trauma: coma to community. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 1982;63:118–123
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linacre JM, Heinemann AW, Wright BD, Granger CV, Hamilton BB. The structure and stability of the FIM. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 1994;75:127–132
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boake C. Supervision Rating Scale: a measure of functional outcome from brain injury. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 1996;77:765–772
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corrigan JD. Development of a scale for assessment of agitation following traumatic brain injury. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neurospychology 1989;11:261–277
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagen C, Malkmus D, Durham P. The Levels of Cognitive Functioning. Downey, CA: Rancho Los Amigos Hospital; 1972
   Google Scholar
• Drake RE, Goldman HH, Leff HS, Lehman AF, Dixon L, Mueser KT, Torrey WC. Implementing evidence-based practices in routine mental health service settings. Psychiatric Services 2001;52:179–182
   Google Scholar
• Camasso MJ, Dick J. Using multi attribute utility theory as a priority-setting tool in human services planning. Evaluation and Program Planning 1993;16:259–304
   Google Scholar
• Lewis DR, Johnson DR, Scholl SR. Assessing state vocational rehabilitation performance in serving individuals with disability. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability 2003;28:24–39
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patton MQ. Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2002
   Google Scholar
• Paulson RI, Post RL, Herinckx HA, Risser P. Beyond components: using fidelity scales to measure and assure choice in program implementation and quality assurance. Community Mental Health Journal 2002;38:119–128
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holter MC, Mowbray CT, Bellamy CD, MacFarlane P, Dukarski J. Critical ingredients of consumer run services: Results of a national survey. Community Mental Health Journal 2004;40:47–63
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Speziale HJS, Carpenter DR. Qualitative research in nursing. 4th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott William & Wilkins; 2007
   Google Scholar
• Brennan PF, Anthony MK. Measuring nursing practice models using multi-attribute utility theory. Reseach in Nursing and Health 2000;23:372–382
   Google Scholar
• Keeney RL, Raiffa H. Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs. New York: Wiley; 1976
   Google Scholar
• Gordon WA, Zafonte R, Cicerone K, Cantor J, Brown M, Lombard L, Goldsmith R, Chandna T. Traumatic brain injury rehabilitation: state of the science. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation 2006;85:343–382
   Google Scholar
• Orwin RG. Assessing program fidelity in substance abuse health services research. Addiction 2000;95:S309–S327
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bond GR, Becker DR, Drake RE, Vogler KM. A fidelity scale for the individual placement and support model of supported employment. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin 1997;40:265–284
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teague GB, Bond GR, Drake RE. Program fidelity in assertive community treatment: development and use of a measure. The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 1998;68:216–232
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar