Department of Health Sciences and Health Policy at University of Lucerne, Nottwil, Switzerland.
Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2012 Jul;91(7):550-60. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0b013e31825597e5.
We aimed to review the global diffusion and clinical implementation of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) endorsed by the World Health Assembly in 2001.
First, we analyzed the diffusion process of the ICF, with a special focus on clinical rehabilitation. This was done by researching the spread of ICF-related terms in Pubmed and Google from 2001 to 2010. Second, we examined the clinical implementation of the ICF in rehabilitation settings by a systematic review of the literature in the databases Pubmed and Embase. Eligible were studies evaluating the current application and impact of the ICF in the daily practice of clinical rehabilitation.
We found that the diffusion of the ICF as a mere term and concept in the area of rehabilitation is successful. However, the implementation in clinical rehabilitation practice is highly idiosyncratic and rarely evaluated appropriately. The question arises whether this idiosyncratic implementation can be regarded as a process toward standardization at all. Evidence of concrete benefits of a clinical ICF implementation for team members or even patients is at best weak.
We suggest more comprehensive and comparable multicenter studies to solve the urgent need for best practice recommendations on ICF implementation in clinical rehabilitation.
本研究旨在回顾世界卫生大会于 2001 年通过的《国际功能、残疾和健康分类》（ICF）在全球的传播和临床实施情况。
首先，我们分析了 ICF 的传播过程，特别关注临床康复。通过在 Pubmed 和 Google 中检索 2001 年至 2010 年 ICF 相关术语的传播情况来进行研究。其次，我们通过对 Pubmed 和 Embase 数据库中的文献进行系统评价，考察了 ICF 在康复环境中的临床实施情况。评估标准为评估 ICF 在临床康复日常实践中的当前应用和影响的研究。
我们发现，ICF 作为一个术语和概念在康复领域的传播是成功的。然而，其在临床康复实践中的应用具有高度的独特性，且很少得到适当的评估。由此产生了一个问题，即这种独特的应用是否可以被视为标准化的过程。对于临床 ICF 实施对团队成员甚至患者的具体益处的证据充其量是微弱的。
我们建议进行更全面和可比的多中心研究，以解决临床康复中 ICF 实施的最佳实践建议的迫切需求。
