Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.
Escola de Educação Física, Fisioterapia e Terapia Ocupacional, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.
Braz J Phys Ther. 2016 Jan-Feb;20(1):15-25. doi: 10.1590/bjpt-rbf.2014.0135. Epub 2016 Jan 19.
Several Brazilian studies have addressed the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), but few have analyzed the knowledge of the health professionals with regards to the ICF.
To verify whether the classification of the items in the Brazilian-Portuguese versions of The Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) and The Disabilities Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaires, obtained from health professionals who worked with patients having upper limb injuries, could be related to ICF components as defined by others studies.
There were 4 participants for the group "professionals with high familiarity of the ICF (PHF)" and 19 for the group of "professionals with some or no familiarity of the ICF (PSNF)". The participants judged whether the items on the two questionnaires belonged to the ICF body function, body structure or activity-participation component, and marked a confidence level for each trial using a numerical scale ranging from zero to 10. The items were classified by the discriminant content validity method using the Student'st-test and the Hochberg correction. The ratings were compared to the literature by the percentage of agreement and Kappa coefficient.
The percentage of agreement of the rating from the PSNF and the PHF groups with the literature was equal to or greater than 77%. For the DASH, the agreement of the PSNF and PHF groups with the literature were, respectively, moderate (Kappa=0.46 to 0.48) and substantial (Kappa=0.62 to 0.70).
Health professionals were able to correlate the three components of the ICF for most items on the 2 questionnaires, demonstrating some ease of understanding the ICF components. However, the relation of concept of pain with body function component is not clear for professional and deserves a more attentive approach.
已有多项巴西研究涉及《国际功能、残疾和健康分类》(ICF),但很少有研究分析健康专业人员对 ICF 的了解程度。
验证对上肢损伤患者进行治疗的健康专业人员对巴西葡萄牙语版《肩部疼痛和残疾指数》(SPADI)和《残疾上肢评估》(DASH)问卷的项目分类,是否与其他研究中定义的 ICF 组成部分相关。
“高度熟悉 ICF 的专业人员”(PHF)组有 4 名参与者,“对 ICF 有一定或不熟悉的专业人员”(PSNF)组有 19 名参与者。参与者判断两个问卷的项目属于 ICF 身体功能、身体结构或活动参与的哪个组成部分,并使用 0 到 10 的数值范围为每个试验标记置信度级别。使用学生 t 检验和 Hochberg 校正,通过判别内容有效性方法对项目进行分类。通过一致性百分比和 Kappa 系数将评分与文献进行比较。
PSNF 和 PHF 组的评分与文献的一致性百分比均等于或大于 77%。对于 DASH,PSNF 和 PHF 组与文献的一致性分别为中度(Kappa=0.46 至 0.48)和高度(Kappa=0.62 至 0.70)。
健康专业人员能够将两个问卷的大多数项目与 ICF 的三个组成部分相关联,表明他们对 ICF 组成部分有一定的理解。然而,专业人员对疼痛概念与身体功能组成部分之间的关系尚不清楚,需要更关注。