Umemori Shu, Ogawa Mao, Yamada Shin, Komatsu Masayo, Oikawa Emiko, Okamoto Yasuyo, Katoh Masaki, Shirasaka Tomohide, Abiko Kagari, Moriizumi Shigehiro, Matsuo Yuichiro, Tohyama Harukazu, Mukaino Masahiko
Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Hokkaido University Hospital, Sapporo 060-8648, Japan.
Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Sapporo Azabu Neurosurgical Hospital, Sapporo 065-0022, Japan.
Healthcare (Basel). 2024 Apr 15;12(8):831. doi: 10.3390/healthcare12080831.
In clinical practice, patient assessments rely on established scales. Integrating data from these scales into the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) framework has been suggested; however, a standardized approach is lacking. Herein, we tested a new approach to develop a conversion table translating clinical scale scores into ICF qualifiers based on a clinician survey. The survey queried rehabilitation professionals about which functional independence measure (FIM) item scores (1-7) corresponded to the ICF qualifiers (0-4). A total of 458 rehabilitation professionals participated. The survey findings indicated a general consensus on the equivalence of FIM scores with ICF qualifiers. The median value for each item remained consistent across all item groups. Specifically, FIM 1 had a median value of 4; FIM 2 and 3 both had median values of 3; FIM 4 and 5 both had median values of 2; FIM 6 had a median value of 1; and FIM 7 had a median value of 0. Despite limitations due to the irreconcilable differences between the frameworks of existing scales and the ICF, these results underline the ICF's potential to serve as a central hub for integrating clinical data from various scales.
在临床实践中,患者评估依赖于既定的量表。有人建议将这些量表的数据整合到《国际功能、残疾和健康分类》(ICF)框架中;然而,目前缺乏一种标准化的方法。在此,我们测试了一种新方法,即基于临床医生调查开发一个转换表,将临床量表分数转换为ICF限定值。该调查询问了康复专业人员哪些功能独立性测量(FIM)项目分数(1 - 7)对应于ICF限定值(0 - 4)。共有458名康复专业人员参与。调查结果表明,对于FIM分数与ICF限定值的等效性存在普遍共识。所有项目组中每个项目的中位数保持一致。具体而言,FIM 1的中位数为4;FIM 2和3的中位数均为3;FIM 4和5的中位数均为2;FIM 6的中位数为1;FIM 7的中位数为0。尽管由于现有量表框架与ICF之间存在无法调和的差异而存在局限性,但这些结果强调了ICF作为整合来自各种量表的临床数据的核心枢纽的潜力。