Content comparisons of stroke-specific quality of life based upon the international classification of functioning, disability, and health
- 367 Downloads
To link the concepts underlying the Stroke-Specific Quality of Life (SS-QOL) scale with those of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF), which are two different perspectives to consider functioning and health. This will facilitate the understanding of the relationships between the SS-QOL and the ICF. One of the purposes of the ICF is to be used as a common terminology and a clinical problem-solving tool in clinical and research settings. The ICF concept of functioning can also serve as the basis for the operationalization of the health-related quality of life. Thus, efforts should be made to allow the concurrent use of the ICF and health measurements in both clinical and research settings.
Linking of the SS-QOL concepts with the ICF categories was carried out by two independently trained health care professionals who applied the standardized eight linking rules that were specifically developed and updated for this purpose. The degree of agreement between the health care professionals was determined by kappa coefficients.
Of the 49 items of the SS-QOL, 54 concepts were identified. The level of agreement between the health care professionals showed that the kappa coefficients ranged from 0.75 to 1.00. Three concepts (5.5%) could not be linked to the ICF and were coded as not covered. Fifty-one were linked to the ICF categories for the following components: 22 (41%)—body functions; 26 (48%)—activities and participation; and three (5.5%)—environmental factors. Eleven ICF chapters were identified.
Several categories of the ICF were linked to the items of the SS-QOL, with acceptable levels of agreement. These categories were specific and meaningful for stroke subjects, since the majority of the identified concepts were included in the comprehensive ICF core set for stroke. The findings indicated that the ICF provided a useful framework for the conceptual understanding of the SS-QOL, which demonstrated multiple representations of the ICF categories and covered a broad range of the ICF components that were meaningful for the stroke subjects.
KeywordsStroke Health related quality of life ICF Health-status measures SS-QOL
Brazilian Government funding Agencies (CNPq/FAPEMIG).
- 3.Organization, World. Health. (2001). International classification of functioning, disability and health: ICF. Geneva. World Healthy Organization. and Rehabilitation, 27(9), 507–528.Google Scholar
- 6.Vrankrijker, M. W. K. (2003). The long way from the international classification of impairments, disabilities and handicaps (ICIDH) to the international classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF). Disability and Rehabilitation, 25(11), 561–564. doi: 10.1080/09638280110110879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Cieza, A., & Stucki, G. (2008). The international classification of functioning, disability and health: Its development process and content validity. European Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 44(3), 303–313.Google Scholar
- 12.Mayo, N. E., Poissant, L., Ahmed, S., Finch, L., Higgins, J., Salbach, N. M., et al. (2004). Incorporating the international classification of functioning, disability, and health (ICF) into an electronic health record to create indicators of function: Proof of concepts using the SF-12. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 11(6), 514–522. doi: 10.1197/jamia.M1462.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Stucki, G., Cieza, A., & Melvin, J. (2007). The international classification of functioning, disability and health: A unifying model for the conceptual description of the rehabilitation strategy. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 39, 279–285. doi: 10.2340/16501977-0041.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Cieza, A., Brockow, T., Ewert, T., Amman, E., Kollerits, B., Chatterji, S., et al. (2002). Linking health-status measurements to the international classification of functioning, disability and health. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 34(5), 205–210. doi: 10.1080/165019702760279189.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Geyh, S., Cieza, A., Kollerits, B., Grimby, G., & Stucki, G. (2007). Content comparisons of health-related quality of life measures used in stroke based on the international classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF): A systematic review. Quality of Life Research, 16(5), 833–851. doi: 10.1007/s11136-007-9174-8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Stucki, G., & Sigl, T. (2003). Assessment of the impact of disease on the individual. Best Practice & Research Clinical Rheumatology, 18(1), 27–39.Google Scholar
- 25.Teixeira-Salmela, L. F., Magalhães, L. C., Souza, A. C., Lima, M. C., Magalhães, R. C., & Goulart, F. (2004). Adaptation of the Nottingham health profile: A simple measure to assess quality of life. Reports on Public Health, 20(4), 905–914.Google Scholar
- 32.Lima, R. C. M., Teixeira-Salmela, L. F., Magalhães, L. C., & Gomes-Neto, M. (2008). Psychometric properties of the Brazilian version of the stroke-specific quality of life scale: Application of the Rasch model. Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy, 12(2), 149–156.Google Scholar
- 35.Portney, L. G., & Watkins, M. P. (2000). Foundations of clinical research: Applications to practice (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
- 36.Franchignoni, F., & Sallaffi, F. (2003). Quality of life assessment in rehabilitation medicine. Europa Medicophysica, 39(4), 191–198.Google Scholar