Advertisement

Development and Testing of an ICF-Based Questionnaire to Evaluate Functioning in Vocational Rehabilitation: The Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ)

  • Monika Elisabeth FingerEmail author
  • Robert De Bie
  • Dennis Nowak
  • Reuben Escorpizo
Chapter
Part of the Handbooks in Health, Work, and Disability book series (SHHDW)

Abstract

This chapter will introduce the reader to an example on how an assessment instrument, based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health can be developed. It lines out the reasoning behind the development of the new instrument as well as the methodology that was used. The instrument is a questionnaire designed to evaluate functioning in vocational rehabilitation – the Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ).

In a further step the strengths and weaknesses of a generic instrument as the WORQ and the need for disease-specific or symptom-specific instruments and their respective roles in the vocational rehabilitation process will be discussed.

In this context we also reflect on the role of environmental and personal factors when evaluating functioning in vocational rehabilitation.

Keywords

Personal Factor Vocational Rehabilitation World Health Survey Vocational Rehabilitation Intervention Vocational Rehabilitation Setting 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    OECD High-Level Forum. Sickness, disability and work; keeping on track in the economic downturn. Background paper, Stockholm; 14–15 May 2009. www.oecd.org/dataoecd/42/15/42699911.pdf. Accessed 1 Aug 2013.
  2. 2.
    De Boer WE, Besseling JJ, Willems JH. Organisation of disability evaluation in 15 countries. Prat et Organ des Soins. 2007;38(3):205–17.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    OECD, editor. Sickness, disability and work: breaking the barriers. Paris: OECD; 2010.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Suva (Swiss accident insurance), editor. Medizinische Mitteilungen, Nr.79. Luzern: Suva; 2008.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Marnetoft SU, Selander J, Bergroth A, Ekholm J. Factors associated with successful vocational rehabilitation in a Swedish rural area. J Rehabil Med. 2001;33(2):71–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kapiriri L, Norheim FO, Martin DK. Priority setting at the micro-, meso- and macro-levels in Canada. Norway and Uganda. Health Policy. 2007;82(1):78–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Coutu MF, Legare F, Durand MJ, Corbiere M, Stacey D, Loisel P, et al. Fostering shared decision making by occupational therapists and workers involved in accidents resulting in persistent musculoskeletal disorders: a study protocol. Implement Sci. 2011;6:22-5908-6-22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    van der Weide WE, Verbeek JH, van Dijk FJ, Doef J. An audit of occupational health care for employees with low-back pain. Occup Med (Lond). 1997;47(5):294–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brunarski D, Shaw L, Doupe L. Moving toward virtual interdisciplinary teams and a multi-stakeholder approach in community-based return-to-work care. Work. 2008;30(3):329–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Guzman J, Esmail R, Karjalainen K, Malmivaara A, Irvin E, Bombardier C. Multidisciplinary bio-psycho-social rehabilitation for chronic low back pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002;1(1):CD000963.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hoving JL, Broekhuizen ML, Frings-Dresen MH. Return to work of breast cancer survivors: a systematic review of intervention studies. BMC Cancer. 2009;9:117.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kissinger DB. Traumatic brain injury and employment outcomes: integration of the working alliance model. Work. 2008;31(3):309–17.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ware JE. SF-36 health survey. Manual and interpretation guide. Boston: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center; 1997.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Beck AT, Steer R, Brown G. Manual for the Beck depression inventory-II. San Antonio: Psychological Corporation; 1996.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fairbank JC, Couper J, Davies JB, O’Brien JP. The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire. Physiotherapy. 1980;66(8):271–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    World Health Organization. International classification of functioning, disability and health. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Finger ME, Escorpizo R, Glassel A, Gmunder HP, Luckenkemper M, Chan C, et al. ICF Core Set for vocational rehabilitation: results of an international consensus conference. Disabil Rehabil. 2012;34(5):429–38.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Escorpizo R, Finger ME, Glassel A, Cieza A. An international expert survey on functioning in vocational rehabilitation using the international classification of functioning, disability and health. J Occup Rehabil. 2011;21(2):147–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Finger ME, Glassel A, Erhart P, Gradinger F, Klipstein A, Rivier G, et al. Identification of relevant ICF categories in vocational rehabilitation: a cross sectional study evaluating the clinical perspective. J Occup Rehabil. 2011;21(2):156–66.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Saltychev M, Kinnunen A, Laimi K. Vocational rehabilitation evaluation and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). J Occup Rehabil. 2013;23(1):106–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    World Health Organization (WHO), editor. How to use ICF: a practical manual for using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Exposure draft for comment. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2013.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Selb M, Escorpizo R, Kostanjsek N, Stucki G, Üstün B, Cieza A. A guide on how to develop an International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Core Set. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2014. [Epub ahead of print] April 1.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cieza A, Oberhauser C, Bickenbach J, Chatterji S, Stucki G. Towards a minimal generic set of domains of functioning and health. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2014;14(1):218.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Stucki G, Cieza A, Ewert T, Kostanjsek N, Chatterji S, Ustun TB. Application of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) in clinical practice. Disabil Rehabil. 2002;24(5):281–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Okochi J, Utsunomiya S, Takahashi T. Health measurement using the ICF: test-retest reliability study of ICF codes and qualifiers in geriatric care. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2005;3:46.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jette AM, Norweg A, Haley SM. Achieving meaningful measurements of ICF concepts. Disabil Rehabil. 2008;30(12–13):963–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rentsch HP, Bucher P, Dommen Nyffeler I, Wolf C, Hefti H, Fluri E, et al. The implementation of the ‘International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health’ (ICF) in daily practice of neurorehabilitation: an interdisciplinary project at the Kantonsspital of Lucerne. Switz Disabil Rehabil. 2003;25(8):411–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hollenweger J. Developing applications of the ICF in education systems: addressing issues of knowledge creation, management and transfer. Disabil Rehabil. 2013;35(13):1087–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jacob T. The implementation of the ICF among Israeli rehabilitation centers – the case of physical therapy. Physiother Theory Pract. 2013;29(7):536–46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Glassel A, Rauch A, Selb M, Emmenegger K, Luckenkemper M, Escorpizo R. A case study on the application of International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF)-based tools for vocational rehabilitation in spinal cord injury. Work. 2012;41(4):465–74.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rauch A, Cieza A, Stucki G. How to apply the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) for rehabilitation management in clinical practice. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2008;44(3):329–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Finger M, Selb M, Escorpizo R. Using ICF in physiotherapy in multidisciplinary vocational rehabilitation: a case study of low back pain. Physiother Res Int. 2014. [Epub ahead of print] April 15.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Finch E, Brooks D, Stratford PW, Mayo NE. Physical rehabilitation outcome measures: a guide to enhanced clinical decision making. 2nd ed. Hamilton: BC Decker; 2002.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Krosnick JA, Presser S. Question and questionnaire design. In: Marsden PV, Wright JD, editors. Handbook of survey research. 2nd ed. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited; 2010. p. 263–313.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Linacre J. Sample size and item calibration stability. Rasch Meas Trans. 1994;7:328.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Linacre JM. Sample size and item calibration [or person measure] stability. Available at: www.rasch.org/rmt/rmt74m.htm. Accessed 28 Mar 2013.
  37. 37.
    Lydell M, Grahn B, Mansson J, Baigi A, Marklund B. Predictive factors of sustained return to work for persons with musculoskeletal disorders who participated in rehabilitation. Work. 2009;33(3):317–28.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Soer R, van der Schans CP, Geertzen JH, Groothoff JW, Brouwer S, Dijkstra PU, et al. Normative values for a functional capacity evaluation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;90(10):1785–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Leung W. How to design a questionnaire. Stud Br Med J. 2001;9:187–9.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Üstün TB, Kostanjsek N, Chatterji S, Rehm J, editors. Measuring health and disability: manual for WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    World Health Organization. World Health Survey instruments and related documents: long version: individual questionnaire. Available at: http://www.who.int/healthinfo/survey/whslonghouseholdhigh.pdf. Accessed 25 Jan 2012.
  42. 42.
    Wewers ME, Lowe NK. A critical review of visual analogue scales in the measurement of clinical phenomena. Res Nurs Health. 1990;13(4):227–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hjermstad MJ, Fayers PM, Haugen DF, Caraceni A, Hanks GW, Loge JH, et al. Studies comparing Numerical Rating Scales, Verbal Rating Scales, and Visual Analogue Scales for assessment of pain intensity in adults: a systematic literature review. J Pain Symptom Manag. 2011;41(6):1073–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Forrest M, Andersen B. Ordinal scale and statistics in medical research. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1986;292(6519):537–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kersten P, Kucukdeveci AA, Tennant A. The use of the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) in rehabilitation outcomes. J Rehabil Med. 2012;44(7):609–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25(24):3186–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    The EuroQol Group. EuroQol – a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy. 1990;16(3):199–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    The WHOQOL Group. Development of the WHOQoL: rationale and current status. Int J Ment Health. 1994;23:24–56.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Finger M, Escorpizo R, Bostan C, De Bie R. Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ): development and preliminary psychometric evidence of an ICF-based questionnaire for vocational rehabilitation. J Occup Rehabil. 2013;24(3):498–510.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Sangha O, Stucki G, Liang MH, Fossel AH, Katz JN. The Self-Administered Comorbidity Questionnaire: a new method to assess comorbidity for clinical and health services research. Arthritis Rheum. 2003;49(2):156–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Field A. Discovering statistics using SPSS. 3rd ed. London: Sage; 2009.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Hinkle D, Wiersma W, Jurs S, editors. Applied statistics for the behavioral sciences. 5th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin; 2003.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    George D, Mallery P. SPSS for Windows step by step: a simple guide and reference. 11.0 update. 4th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon; 2003.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Bickenbach J, Cieza A, Selb M, Emmenegger K, Lückenkemper M, Escorpizo R, editors. ICF core sets: manual for clinical practice. 1st ed. Göttingen: Hogrefe; 2012.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Linder J, Ekholm KS, Jansen G, Lundh G, Ekholm J. Long-term sick leavers with difficulty in resuming work: comparisons between psychiatric-somatic comorbidity and monodiagnosis. Int J Rehabil Res. 2009;32(1):20–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Official Social Security Website, USA. Code of federal regulations § 404.1567. Physical exertiooon requirements. Available at: http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/cfr20/404/404-1567.htm. Accessed 20 Jan 2014.
  57. 57.
    Le Pen C, Levy E, Loos F, Banzet MN, Basdevant A. “Specific” scale compared with “generic” scale: a double measurement of the quality of life in a French community sample of obese subjects. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1998;52(7):445–50.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Streibelt M, Egner U. A systematic review of the predictors of return to work following vocational retraining. Rehabilitation (Stuttg). 2013;52(2):111–8.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Bergström G, Hagberg J, Busch H, Jensen I, Björklund C. Prediction of sickness absenteeism, disability pension and sickness presenteeism among employees with back pain. J Occup Rehabil. 2013. doi: 10.1007/s10926-013-9454-9.PubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Zoer I, de Graaf L, Kuijer PP, Prinzie P, Hoozemans MJ, Frings-Dresen MH. Matching work capacities and demands at job placement in employees with disabilities. Work. 2012;42(2):205–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Vocational Rehabilitation Task Group, Industrial Injuries Advisory Council, Waddell G, Burton AK, Kendall NA. Vocational rehabilitation – what works, for whom, and when? 1st ed. London: TSO (The Stationery Office); 2008.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Iles RA, Davidson M, Taylor NF. Psychosocial predictors of failure to return to work in non-chronic non-specific low back pain: a systematic review. Occup Environ Med. 2008;65(8):507–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Nicholas MK, Linton SJ, Watson PJ, Main CJ, “Decade of the Flags” Working Group. Early identification and management of psychological risk factors (“yellow flags”) in patients with low back pain: a reappraisal. Phys Ther. 2011;91(5):737–53.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Monika Elisabeth Finger
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  • Robert De Bie
    • 4
  • Dennis Nowak
    • 5
  • Reuben Escorpizo
    • 1
    • 2
    • 6
  1. 1.ICF UnitSwiss Paraplegic ResearchNottwilSwitzerland
  2. 2.ICF Research Branch, WHO CC FIC in Germany (DIMDI)NottwilSwitzerland
  3. 3.Caphri Research SchoolMaastricht UniversityMaastrichtThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Department of Epidemiology and Institute for EducationMaastricht UniversityMaastrichtThe Netherlands
  5. 5.Institute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, Clinical CenterLudwig-Maximilians-UniversityMunichGermany
  6. 6.Department of Rehabilitation and Movement ScienceThe University of VermontBurlingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations