Responsiveness of two participation measures in an outpatient rehabilitation setting

References

• Hemmingsson H, Jonsson H. An occupational perspective on the concept of participation in the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: Some critical remarks. Am J Occup Ther 2005;59:569–76.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Geneva: WHO; 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Gray JM. Discussion of the ICIDH-2 in relation to occupational therapy and occupational science. Scand J Occup Ther 2001;8:19–30.
   Google Scholar
• Law M. Participation in the occupations of everyday life. Am J Occup Ther 2002;56:640–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heinemann AW. Putting outcome measurement in context: A rehabilitation psychology perspective. Rehabil Psychol 2005;50:6–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magasi S, Post MW. A comparative review of contemporary participation measures' psychometric properties and content coverage. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2010;91:S17–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wade DT. Outcome measures for clinical rehabilitation trials: Impairment, function, quality of life, or value? Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2003;82:S26–31.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noonan VK, Kopec JA, Noreau L, Singer J, Dvorak MF. A review of participation instruments based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Disabil Rehabil 2009;31:1883–901.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dijkers MP. Issues in the conceptualization and measurement of participation: An overview. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2010;91:S5–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Post MWM. Measuring the subjective appraisal of participation with life satisfaction measures: Bridging the gap between participation and quality of life measurement. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil 2010;15:1–15.
   Google Scholar
• Brown M, Dijkers MP, Gordon WA, Ashman T, Charatz H, Cheng Z. Participation objective, participation subjective: A measure of participation combining outsider and insider perspectives. J Head Trauma Rehabil 2004;19:459–81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston MV, Goverover Y, Dijkers M. Community activities and individuals' satisfaction with them: Quality of life in the first year after traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2005;86:735–45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rochette A, Korner-Bitensky N, Levasseur M. “Optimal” participation: A reflective look. Disabil Rehabil 2006;28:1231–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whiteneck G, Dijkers MP. Difficult to measure constructs: Conceptual and methodological issues concerning participation and environmental factors. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2009;90:S22–35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perenboom RJ, Chorus AM. Measuring participation according to the international classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF). Disabil Rehabil 2003;25:577–87.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardol M, De Jong BA, Ward CD. On autonomy and participation in rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil 2002;24:970–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Law M, Baptiste S, Mills J. Client-centred practice: What does it mean and does it make a difference? Can J Occup Ther 1995;62:250–7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cardol M, De Haan RJ, De Jong BA, Van den Bos GAM, De Groot IJM. The development of a handicap assessment questionnaire: The Impact on Participation and Autonomy (IPA). Clin Rehabil 1999;13:411–19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardol M, De Haan RJ, De Jong BA, Van den Bos GAM, De Groot IJM. Psychometric properties of the questionnaire Impact on Participation and Autonomy (IPA). Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001;82:210–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poulin V, Desrosiers J. Validation française de questionnaires de participation sociale après d'aînés en situation d'incapacités [French validation of social participation questionnaires by incapacitated elderly people]. Can J Occup Ther 2010;77:159–66; in French.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vazirinejad R, Lilley JM, Ward CD. The “Impact on Participation and Autonomy”: acceptability of the English version in a multiple sclerosis outpatient setting. Mult Scler 2003;9:612–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kersten P, Cardol M, George S, Ward C, Sibley A, White B. Validity of the impact on participation and autonomy questionnaire: A comparison between two countries. Disabil Rehabil 2007;29:1502–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lund ML, Fisher AG, Lexell J, Bernspang B. Impact on participation and autonomy questionnaire: Internal scale validity of the Swedish version for use in people with spinal cord injury. J Rehabil Med 2007;39:156–62.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fallahpour M, Jonsson H, Joghataei MT, Kottorp A. Impact on Participation and Autonomy (IPA): Psychometric evaluation of the Persian version to use for persons with stroke. Scand J Occup Ther 2011;18:59–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardol M, Beelen A, Van den Bos GA, De Jong BA, De Groot IJ, De Haan RJ. Responsiveness of the Impact on Participation and Autonomy Questionnaire. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002;83:1524–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Zee CH, Priesterbach AR, Van der Dussen L, Kap A, Schepers VPM, Visser-Meily JMA, Reproducibility of three self-report participation measures: The ICF Measure of Participation and Activities Screener, the Participation Scale, and the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation-Participation. J Rehabil Med 2010;42:752–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Post MWM, Van der Zee CH, Hennink J, Schafrat CGWM, Visser-Meily JMA, Berdenis van Berlekom S. Validity of the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation – Participation (USER-Participation). Disabil Rehabil 2012;34:478–85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Zee CH, Kap A, Rambaran Mishre R, Schouten EJ, Post MWM. Responsiveness of four participation measures for outcomes of outpatient rehabilitation. J Rehabil Med 2011;43:1003–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. “Mini-Mental State”: A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 1975;12:189–98.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deelman BG, Koning-Haanstra M, Liebrand WBG, Van den Burg W. SAN test (SAN). Amsterdam: Pearson Testpublisher; 1981.
   Google Scholar
• Terwee CB, Bot SDM, De Boer MR, Van der Windt DAWM, Knol DL, Dekker J, Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 2007;60:34–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kazis LE, Anderson JJ, Meenan RF. Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Med Care 1989;27:S178–89.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen J. Statistical power analyses for the behavioural sciences. 2nd ed. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1988.
   Google Scholar
• Liang MH. Evaluating measurement responsiveness. J Rheumatol 1995;22:1191–2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liang MH, Fossel AH, Larson MG. Comparisons of five health status instruments for orthopedic evaluation. Med Care 1990;28:632–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zou GY. Quantifying responsiveness of quality of life measures without an external criterion. Qual Life Res 2005;14:1545–52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, Gladman DD. Methods for assessing responsiveness: A critical review and recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol 2000;53:459–68.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu C, Chuan L, Lin K, Horng Y. Responsiveness and validity of two outcome measures of instrumental activities of daily living in stroke survivors receiving rehabilitative therapies. Clin Rehabil 2011;25:175–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holbrook M, Skilbeck CE. An activities index for use with stroke patients. Age Ageing 1983;12:166–70.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freeman JA, Langdon DW, Hobart JC, Thompson AJ. The impact of inpatient rehabilitation on progressive multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 1997;42:236–44.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harwood RH, Gompertz P, Ebrahim S. Handicap one year after a stroke: Validity of a new scale. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1994;57:825–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schepers V, Ketelaar M, Visser-Meily A, Dekker J, Lindeman E. Responsiveness of functional health status measures frequently used in stroke research. Disabil Rehabil 2006;28:1035–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haley SM, Gandek B, Siebens H, Black-Schaffer RM, Sinclair SJ, Tao W, Computerized adaptive testing for follow-up after discharge from inpatient rehabilitation, II: Participation outcomes. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2008;89:275–83.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wade DT, De Jong BA. Recent advances in rehabilitation. BMJ 2000;320:1385–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen ME, Marino RJ. The tools of disability outcomes research functional status measures. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2000;81:S21–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eyssen IC, Steultjens MP, Oud TA, Bolt EM, Maasdam A, Dekker J. Responsiveness of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. J Rehabil Res Dev 2011;48:517–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kiresuk T, Sherman R. Goal Attainment Scaling: A general method for evaluating comprehensive community mental health programs. Community Ment Health J 1964;4:443–53.
   Google Scholar
• Reinhardt JD, Post MWM. Measurement and evidence of environmental determinants of participation in spinal cord injury: A systematic review of the literature. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil 2011;15:26–48.
   Google Scholar
• Terwee CB, Roorda LD, Dekker J, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, Peat G, Jordan KP, Large variation among populations and methods. J Clin Epidemiol 2010;63:524–34.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar