Functioning and disability in ischaemic heart disease

Racca, Vittorio; Spezzaferri, Rosa; Modica, Maddalena; Mazzini, Paola; Jonsdottir, Johanna; Maria, Renata De; Ferratini, Maurizio

doi:10.3109/09638288.2010.511691

Cited by 24 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Heart disease is a common and increasing health problem worldwide [1]. Independent of diagnosis and etiology, heart diseases usually have a significant negative impact on people's quality of life (QoL) and well-being with high symptom burden, emotional reactions, reduced physical capacity, and social isolation [2][3][4][5][6]. Over the past decade, the importance of person-centered care, which includes patients' experiences of diseases and their impact on their daily lives, has been recognized [7][8][9][10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A scoping review and mapping exercise comparing the content of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) across heart disease-specific scales

Algurén

Coenen²,

Malm

et al. 2020

J Patient Rep Outcomes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Over the past decade, the importance of person-centered care has led to increased interest in patientreported outcome measures (PROMs). In cardiovascular care, selecting an appropriate PROM for clinical use or research is challenging because multimorbidity is often common in patients. The aim was therefore to provide an overview of heartdisease specific PROMs and to compare the content of those outcomes using a bio-psycho-social framework of health. Methods: A scoping review of heart disease-specific PROMs, including arrhythmia/atrial fibrillation, congenital heart disease, heart failure, ischemic heart disease, and valve diseases was conducted in PubMed (January 2018). All items contained in the disease-specific PROMs were mapped to WHO's International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) according to standardized linking rules. Results: A total of 34 PROMs (heart diseases in general n = 5; cardiac arrhythmia n = 6; heart failure n = 14; ischemic heart disease n = 9) and 147 ICF categories were identified. ICF categories covered Body functions (n = 61), Activities & Participation (n = 69), and Environmental factors (n = 17). Most items were about experienced problems of Body functions and less often about patients' daily activities, and most PROMs were specifically developed for heart failure and no PROM were identified for valve disease or congenital heart disease. Conclusions: Our results motivate and provide information to develop comprehensive PROMs that consider activity and participation by patients with various types of heart disease.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A scoping review and mapping exercise comparing the content of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) across heart disease-specific scales

Algurén

Coenen²,

Malm

et al. 2020

J Patient Rep Outcomes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…ICF's multidimensional approach can be useful in the management of uncommon issues related to a disease, issues that go beyond symptom treatment and include daily life situations such as those encountered in employment [3,4]. Other possible advantages in clinical practice concern the recognition, under a common and consistent framework, of a multitude of clinical symptoms, such as those that are cognitive or mobility-related, which in turn impact on a variety of daily activities [5,6], and the possibility of following the disease's course from post-acute settings, to rehabilitation and to outpatient management [7][8][9]. In addition and more broadly, the feasibility of using ICF in this manner facilitates the description of the unequal opportunities to fully participate in society that persons with disabilities experience and, ultimately, measuring the difference between opportunities for participation that persons with and those without difficulties in functioning experience.…”

Section: Background: Mhadie Research and Policy Challengesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Integrating research into policy planning: MHADIE policy recommendations

Leonardi¹,

Chatterji

Ayuso-Mateos

et al. 2010

Disability and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

MHADIE project (Measuring Health and Disability in Europe: Supporting policy development) aimed at developing realistic, evidence-based and effective national policies for persons with disabilities. A preliminary step towards this goal was the demonstration on the feasibility of employing the ICF in clinical, educational and statistical fields, which corresponds to the recognised need to enhance the European Union's capacity of analysis of disability, as highlighted in its Disability Action Plan 2006-2007. The ultimate outcome of the project is the production of 13 policy recommendations, dealing with statistics clinical and educational areas, and four general policy recommendations focusing on: (a) the need of coordinating and integrating disability conceptualization at all policy levels and across sectors; (b) the need of conducting longitudinal cohort studies which include children aged 0-6; (c) the need of reviewing transportation policies in light of the requirements of persons with disabilities; (d) the need of reviewing all disability policies to emphasise and support the role of the family, which is a consistent and substantial environmental facilitator in the lives of persons with disabilities.

show abstract

“…Thanks to these studies, which are described in several papers in the present issue of Disability and Rehabilitation [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15], MHADIE researchers have been able to help to ensure that the same protocols were identically implemented and that similar quality control procedures were followed at all sites. For the application in clinical settings for all consecutive patients admitted to the participating facilities over a 12-month period ICF related instruments were used: the ICF checklist [16], disease-specific ICF core-sets [17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24], the (WHO Disability Assessment Schedule, 2nd version (WHO-DAS II) [25,26].…”

Section: Measuring Health and Disability In Clinical And Rehabilitatimentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring health and disability: supporting policy development. The European MHADIE project

Leonardi¹

2010

Disability and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Functioning and disability in ischaemic heart disease

Abstract: ICF application in patients with IHD enables to enlarge the perspective on their health status, and provide useful information to follow the healthcare process from the acute setting to the outpatient management.

Cited by 24 publications

References 30 publications

A scoping review and mapping exercise comparing the content of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) across heart disease-specific scales

A scoping review and mapping exercise comparing the content of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) across heart disease-specific scales

Integrating research into policy planning: MHADIE policy recommendations

Measuring health and disability: supporting policy development. The European MHADIE project

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About