@article{ProdingerScheelSailerEscorpizoetal.2017, author = {Prodinger, Birgit and Scheel-Sailer, A. and Escorpizo, R. and Stucki, G.}, title = {UEMS-PRM ICF workshop moderators and rapporteurs. (2017) European initiative for the application of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: Development of Clinical Assessment Schedules for specified rehabilitation services}, series = {European Journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine}, volume = {53}, journal = {European Journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine}, number = {2}, pages = {319 -- 332}, year = {2017}, abstract = {Clinical assessment schedule (CLAS) is a core part of the ICF-based implementation of functioning reporting across health conditions and along the continuum of care. The Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine Section and Board of the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS PRM) workshop held in January 2016 aimed to develop and specify a CLAS within the context of rehabilitation services. UEMS PRM Workshop in Nottwil, Switzerland, January 2016.PRM physicians representatives from 12 European countries, as well as Israel and Japan, mostly delegates of UEMS PRM Section and Board, and experts with other rehabilitation professional backgrounds.Participants were divided into 6 working groups and asked to specify what functioning aspects would be essential to document using the available ICF sets for the identified rehabilitation services contained in the newly developed service classification (ICSO-R): acute, post-acute and long-term rehabilitation services. The 7 ICF Generic and 23 Rehabilitation Set categories were confirmed as well as specific health condition categories for acute rehabilitation services (mobile team), for postacute rehabilitation services (general outpatient rehabilitation, musculoskeletal and neurological rehabilitation, as well as specialized SCI rehabilitation), and for long-term rehabilitation services (day clinic and rehabilitation provided in the community). While general principles of the CLAS were defined, the need to align the CLAS for a specific service, as well as across services along the continuum of care was highlighted. All groups deliberated on this topic; however, no conclusive statement was presented yet.The groups recognized a need for a systematic effort to identify data collection tools currently used.CLASs will serve in the future to ensure that functioning information is systematically and consistently collected across services, and thus respond also to various global reports and initiatives which stress the need for improving data collection on people's functioning.}, language = {en} } @article{ProdingerReinhardSelbetal.2016, author = {Prodinger, Birgit and Reinhard, J.D. and Selb, M. and Stucki, G. and Yan, T. and Zhang, C. and Li, J.}, title = {Towards system-wide implementation of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) in routine practice: Developing simple, intuitive descriptions of ICF categories in the ICF Generic and Rehabilitation Set}, series = {Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine}, volume = {48}, journal = {Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine}, number = {6}, pages = {508 -- 514}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Objective: A national, multi-phase, consensus process to develop simple, intuitive descriptions of International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) categories contained in the ICF Generic and Rehabilitation Sets, with the aim of enhancing the utility of the ICF in routine clinical practice, is presented in this study. Methods: A multi-stage, national, consensus process was conducted. The consensus process involved 3 expert groups and consisted of a preparatory phase, a consensus conference with consecutive working groups and 3 voting rounds (votes A, B and C), followed by an implementation phase. In the consensus conference, participants first voted on whether they agreed that an initially developed proposal for simple, intuitive descriptions of an ICF category was in fact simple and intuitive. Results: The consensus conference was held in August 2014 in mainland China. Twenty-one people with a background in physical medicine and rehabilitation participated in the consensus process. Four ICF categories achieved consensus in vote A, 16 in vote B, and 8 in vote C. Discussion: This process can be seen as part of a larger effort towards the system-wide implementation of the ICF in routine clinical and rehabilitation practice to allow for the regular and comprehensive evaluation of health outcomes most relevant for the monitoring of quality of care.}, language = {en} } @article{ProdingerBallertBrachetal.2016, author = {Prodinger, Birgit and Ballert, C. S. and Brach, M. and Brinkhof, M. W. G. and Cieza, A. and Hug, K. and Jordan, X. and Post, M. W. M. and Scheel-Sailer, A. and Schubert, M. and Tennant, A. and Stucki, G.}, title = {Toward standardized reporting for a cohort study on functioning: The Swiss Spinal Cord Injury Cohort Study}, series = {Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine}, volume = {48}, journal = {Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine}, number = {2}, pages = {189 -- 196}, year = {2016}, abstract = {Objective: Functioning is an important outcome to measure in cohort studies. Clear and operational outcomes are needed to judge the quality of a cohort study. This paper outlines guiding principles for reporting functioning in cohort studies and addresses some outstanding issues. Design: Principles of how to standardize reporting of data from a cohort study on functioning, by deriving scores that are most useful for further statistical analysis and reporting, are outlined. The Swiss Spinal Cord Injury Cohort Study Community Survey serves as a case in point to provide a practical application of these principles. Methods and Results: Development of reporting scores must be conceptually coherent and metrically sound. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) can serve as the frame of reference for this, with its categories serving as reference units for reporting. To derive a score for further statistical analysis and reporting, items measuring a single latent trait must be invariant across groups. The Rasch measurement model is well suited to test these assumptions. Conclusion: Our approach is a valuable guide for researchers and clinicians, as it fosters comparability of data, strengthens the comprehensiveness of scope, and provides invariant, interval-scaled data for further statistical analyses of functioning.}, language = {en} }