Department of Neurology, Washington University School of Medicine, Campus Box 8111, 4488 Forest Park, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA.
Program in Occupational Therapy, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
BMC Psychol. 2015 Oct 14;3:36. doi: 10.1186/s40359-015-0093-0.
Participation is increasingly becoming an important outcome for assessment in many fields, including development, disability and policy implementation. However, selecting specific instruments to measure participation has been a significant problem due to overlapping conceptual definitions and use of different theories. The objective of this paper is to identify participation instruments, examine theories/definition supporting their use and highlight scales for use in low and middle-income countries for persons with mental illness.
A systematic literature review was conducted to identify instruments intended to measure participation for individuals with severe mental illness. The search was limited to peer-reviewed articles published in English between 2003 and 2014. Instruments that measured related concepts of well-being, quality of life and social functioning were also identified and screened for items that pertained to participation, defined as empowerment and collective capabilities.
Five scales met established criteria for assessing participation and were determined to contain questions measuring empowerment and/or collective capabilities. However, each scale largely assessed individual functioning and capacity, while neglecting collective aspects of the community. All scales were developed in high-income countries and none were used in low and middle-income countries.
There is an urgent need for participation scales to focus on empowerment as well as collective capabilities. Further, development of participation scales should clearly delineate theoretical foundations and concepts used. Finally, participation scales used in low and middle income countries should consider how contextual factors like medicine, poverty and disability, particularly with regards to mental illness, impact content of the scale.
参与度在许多领域,包括发展、残疾和政策执行等领域,已逐渐成为一个重要的评估结果。然而,由于概念定义重叠和使用不同的理论,选择特定的工具来衡量参与度一直是一个重大问题。本文的目的是确定参与度工具,检查支持其使用的理论/定义,并强调在中低收入国家用于精神疾病患者的量表。
进行了系统的文献回顾,以确定用于衡量严重精神疾病患者参与度的工具。搜索范围仅限于 2003 年至 2014 年期间以英文发表的同行评议文章。还确定了测量与幸福感、生活质量和社会功能相关概念的工具,并对与参与度(定义为赋权和集体能力)相关的项目进行了筛选。
有五个量表符合评估参与度的既定标准,并确定包含衡量赋权和/或集体能力的问题。然而,每个量表主要评估个人的功能和能力,而忽略了社区的集体方面。所有量表均在高收入国家开发,没有一个在中低收入国家使用。
迫切需要有专门的量表来关注赋权和集体能力。此外,参与度量表的制定应明确划定所使用的理论基础和概念。最后,在中低收入国家使用的参与度量表应考虑到药物、贫困和残疾等环境因素(特别是与精神疾病有关的因素)如何影响量表的内容。