International Classification of Functioning in professional rehabilitation: instruments for assessing work disability

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To review the main instruments of functional assessment and health status cited in the literature to evaluate Brazilian workers and verify the compatibility of their items with the core set for professional rehabilitation. METHODS: A review of the literature was conducted in the main databases in search of articles that used assessment instruments in populations of workers between 2007 and 2017. Subsequently, the contents of the identified instruments were retrieved, and two evaluators analyzed their items to verify the compatibility with the categories of the core set of the International Classification of Functioning for professional rehabilitation. Cohen’s kappa coefficient was used to evaluate the agreement between the evaluators. RESULTS: Five specific and eight generic instruments were selected to evaluate the functioning of workers. The analysis of the items of the total instruments allowed the definition of 58 categories (64.5%) of the core set with minimal overlap: 13 (76.5%) of the body functions component, 29 (72.5%) of the activities and participation component and 16 (49%) environmental factors. CONCLUSIONS: The association of several instruments requires time and makes it difficult to use the classification. The development of instruments with direct association with its categories is essential to operationalize it.

A general framework for selecting work participation outcomes in intervention studies among persons with health problems: a concept paper

“…Of the eight studies that provided a classification of recommended outcomes and measures for work participation, one considered the most commonly used outcome measures (including employment status, sick leave, return to work, and role functioning) [ 20 ], five used ICF items [ 14 , 33 , 42 , 76 , 77 ], and two looked at productivity [ 78 ] and absenteeism [ 19 ] separately (Table 2 ). A meaningful general classification of work capacity outcomes may require additional considerations, such as the aim of the study, which often revolves around the effectiveness of an intervention, or the perspective taken in the study, i.e., that of employers, workers, or society.…”

“…Researchers have proposed varying lists of ICF items [ 33 , 42 , 76 ] and measurement instruments that could be used to measure a core set of ICF items for vocational rehabilitation [ 77 ]. However, these lists address a broad spectrum of issues related to vocational rehabilitation beyond outcomes that measure the effectiveness of interventions and do not intend to be a classification of outcomes to be used in trials.…”

“… 6. Be in alignment with the ICF model The ICF is a widely used model in (occupational) health sciences and practice [ 13 , 14 , 27 , 28 , 33 , 77 ]. Optional criteria 7.…”

Letramento funcional em saúde em adultos e idosos com disfagia

“…Activity limitations and restriction to participation in dysphagia are based on the structuring of the biopsychosocial model of the World Health Organization and, consequently, of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (CIF), as guiding health care. Thus, when examining dysphagia from the perspective of human functionality, we observe the need to change an approach based on the disease and its consequences to a perspective anchored in functionality as a component of health (23) , and in the understanding that the situations of health are diverse and should be treated differently, according to the limitations of activities and restrictions on the participation of each individual (24,25) . In this context, patients with similar degrees of dysphagia may have different limitations of activity and restrictions on participation in dysphagia.…”

A general framework for selecting work participation outcomes in intervention studies among persons with health problems.

“…Researchers have proposed varying lists of ICF items (27,36,71) and measurement instruments that could be used to measure a core set of ICF items for vocational rehabilitation (72). However, these lists address a broad spectrum of issues related to vocational rehabilitation beyond outcomes that measure the effectiveness of interventions and do not intend to be a classi cation of outcomes to be used in trials.…”