Salter Katherine, McClure J Andrew, Foley Norine C, Teasell Robert
Aging, Rehabilitation & Geriatric Care Program, Lawson Health Research Institute, London, Ontario, Canada.
Brain Inj. 2011;25(12):1147-54. doi: 10.3109/02699052.2011.613088. Epub 2011 Sep 30.
The objectives of the present study are (1) to examine whether the content of existing community integration measures used following traumatic brain injury (TBI) is represented in the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) and (2) to determine if the ICF provides a reasonable framework within which such measurement tools may be compared.
Five commonly-used assessment instruments were selected for inclusion. Independent raters mapped identified measurement concepts to the ICF using established linking rules.
One hundred and eighty-five concepts were identified from 85 items in five scales. Of these more than 75% could be linked to the ICF. The majority of linked concepts were assigned to 64 categories within the activities and participation component of the ICF; however, the focus of assessment within each instrument varied considerably.
Through a standardized process of item mapping to the ICF, one may examine operationalizations of community integration. This may help inform selection of a method of assessment appropriate to both the subject population and clinical or research purpose. However, this process allows comparison of only the objective content of measurement tools. Subjective evaluations may also be necessary to provide comprehensive assessment of community integration.
本研究的目标是：（1）检查创伤性脑损伤（TBI）后使用的现有社区融合测量方法的内容是否在《国际功能、残疾和健康分类》（ICF）中有体现；（2）确定ICF是否提供了一个合理的框架，以便在其中比较此类测量工具。
选择了五种常用的评估工具纳入研究。独立评分者使用既定的关联规则将确定的测量概念映射到ICF。
从五个量表的85个条目中确定了185个概念。其中超过75%的概念可以与ICF关联。大多数关联概念被归入ICF活动和参与部分的64个类别中；然而，每个工具内的评估重点差异很大。
通过将条目映射到ICF的标准化过程，可以检查社区融合的操作化情况。这可能有助于为选择适合目标人群以及临床或研究目的的评估方法提供参考。然而，这个过程仅允许比较测量工具的客观内容。可能还需要进行主观评估，以全面评估社区融合情况。
