Assessment of activity limitations and participation restrictions with persons with chronic fatigue syndrome: a systematic review

Vergauwen, Kuni; Huijnen, Ivan P.J.; Kos, Daphne; Velde, Dominique Van de; Eupen, Inge Van

doi:10.3109/09638288.2014.978507

Cited by 15 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 80 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…lack of hypothesis formed a-priori in construct validation and no testing of factors prior to internal consistency analysis) highlight the need for particular attention to be made to the methods of psychometric studies. This is similar to the finding of Vergauwen and Huijnen [ 112 ], in a review of assessments for people with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome [ 113 ].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Functional Assessments Used by Occupational Therapists with Older Adults at Risk of Activity and Participation Limitations: A Systematic Review

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThe use of functional assessments to evaluate patient change is complicated by a lack of consensus as to which assessment is most suitable for use with older adults. Objective: To identify and appraise the properties of assessments used to evaluate functional abilities in older adults.MethodsA systematic review of randomised controlled trials of occupational therapy interventions was conducted up to 2012 to identify assessments used to measure function. Two authors screened and extracted data independently. A second search then identified papers investigating measurement properties of each assessment. Studies from the second search were included if: i) published in English, ii) the assessment was not modified from its original published form, iii) study aim was to evaluate the quality of the tool, iv) and was original research. Translated versions of assessments were excluded. Measurement quality was rated using the COSMIN checklist and Terwee criteria.ResultsTwenty-eight assessments were identified from the systematic search of occupational therapy interventions provided to older adults. Assessments were of varied measurement quality and many had been adapted (although still evaluated as though the original tool had been administered) potentially altering the conclusions drawn about measurement quality. Synthesis of best evidence established 15 functional assessments have not been tested in an older adult population.ConclusionsThe Functional Autonomy Measurement System (SMAF) appears to be a promising assessment for use with older adults. Only two tools (the SMAF and the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (AMPS)) were deemed to be responsive to change when applied to older adults. Health professionals should use functional assessments that have been validated with their population and in their setting. There are reliable and valid assessments to capture the functional performance of older adults in community and hospital settings, although further refinement of these assessments may be necessary.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Functional Assessments Used by Occupational Therapists with Older Adults at Risk of Activity and Participation Limitations: A Systematic Review

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) are available to measure participation, both generic and disease-specific [ 8 , 10 – 14 ], but their use is associated with a number of challenges. The instruments vary in content and operationalization of the concept of participation [ 10 – 12 ] and in their measurement properties [ 11 , 15 – 17 ]. Scores of different instruments are incomparable because the scales are ordinal and even if scores are expressed on a scale from 0 to 100, one cannot assume that a score of 40 points on one instrument corresponds to a score of 40 points on another instrument.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of two PROMIS item banks for measuring social participation in the Dutch general population

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Meanwhile, 25 systematic reviews (Alheresh, Vaughan, LaValley, Coster & Keysor, ; Barten, Pisters, Huisman, Takken & Veenhof, ; Bautista, Whittingham, Edwards & Boyd, ; Bissett, Cusick & Lannin, ; Bouffard, Bertrand‐Charette & Roy, ; Chumney et al ., ; Cordier et al ., , ; Darzins, Imms & Di Stefano, ; Furlan, Noonan, Singh & Fehlings, ; Ireland & Johnston, ; James, Ziviani & Boyd, ; Janaudis‐Ferreira, Beauchamp, Robles, Goldstein & Brooks, ; Ji & Liu, ; Kaur, Belchior, Gelinas & Bier, ; Kendzerska, Smith, Brignardello‐Petersen, Leung & Tomlinson, ; Magasi & Post, ; Mollayeva et al ., ; Mollayeya, Kendzerska & Colantonio, ; Monjazebi et al ., ; Rainey, van Nispen, van der Zee & van Rens, ; Sikkes, Klerk, Pijnenburg, Scheltens & Uitdehaag, ; Vergauwen et al ., ; Wales, Clemson, Lannin & Cameron, ) used standardised quality checklists such as the COSMIN and Terwee's Checklist to evaluate the quality of the psychometric reporting. Fifteen reviews (Bartula & Sherman, ; de Baets et al ., ; Gouttebarge, Wind, Kuijer & Frings‐Dresen, ; Harvey, Robin, Morris, Graham & Baker, ; Holden, Jones, Baker, Boersma & Kluger, ; Innes, ; Innes & Straker, ,b; Lewandowski, Toliver‐Sokol & Palermo, ; Lotzin et al ., ; Monod et al ., ; Peer & Tenhula, ; Swinkels, Dijkstra & Bouter, ; Tse, Douglas, Lentin & Carey, ; Williams et al ., ) used a non‐standardised checklist (i.e.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Overview of reviews of standardised occupation‐based instruments for use in occupational therapy practice

Romli

Yunus

Mackenzie

2019

Aus Occup Therapy J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction:Using standardised instruments is one approach to support evidence-based practice. Referring to systematic reviews is an option to identify suitable instruments. However, with an abundance of systematic reviews available, therapists are challenged to identify an appropriate instrument to use. Therefore, this overview of reviews aimed to summarise relevant systematic review findings about standardised occupation-based instruments relevant for occupational therapy practice. Methods: An overview of reviews was conducted. A systematic search was performed on four databases up to March 2018. Included systematic reviews were analysed for quality using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR). Results: A total of 2187 articles were identified after removing duplicates. Ultimately, 58 systematic reviews were identified that yielded 641 instruments. From those, 45 instruments were selected for appraisal as they met the inclusion criteria of being developed mainly by occupational therapists and were recommended in the summarised findings from the systematic reviews. The instruments were classified according to the following occupation domains: (i) multidimensional, (ii) activities of daily living, (iii) productivity, (iv) social, (v) sleep/rest, (vi) sexuality and (vii) spirituality. No systematic review was identified that specifically focussed on occupations related to school/education, leisure and play. Discussion: Certain occupation domains such as activities of daily living, social and sleep/rest received high attention amongst researchers. There is a need for systematic reviews of instruments to measure education/school, play and leisure. Limited numbers of instruments were developed by occupational therapists outside the occupation domain of activities of daily living, and in areas of practice other than children and older people. Nevertheless, this overview can give some guidance for occupational therapists in selecting a suitable occupational therapy instrument for practice.

show abstract

Assessment of activity limitations and participation restrictions with persons with chronic fatigue syndrome: a systematic review

Cited by 15 publications

References 80 publications

Functional Assessments Used by Occupational Therapists with Older Adults at Risk of Activity and Participation Limitations: A Systematic Review

Functional Assessments Used by Occupational Therapists with Older Adults at Risk of Activity and Participation Limitations: A Systematic Review

Validation of two PROMIS item banks for measuring social participation in the Dutch general population

Overview of reviews of standardised occupation‐based instruments for use in occupational therapy practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About