Adaptacao e validacao do WHODAS 2.0 em utentes com dor musculoesqueletica

Silva, Carla; Coleta, Inês; Silva, Ana; A, Amaro Cendón; Alvarelhão, Joaquim; Queirós, Alexandra; Rocha, Nelson Pacheco da

doi:10.1590/s0034-8910.2013047004374

Cited by 41 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The Cronbach’s alpha was all above 0.7 indicating satisfactory internal consistency which is consistent with other studies including similar groups of patients [ 9 – 12 , 17 , 18 , 33 , 34 ]. The ICC of the different domains and for the total score indicated acceptable reproducibility except for Self - care .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Validation of World Health Organization Assessment Schedule 2.0 in specialized somatic rehabilitation services in Norway

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 is a generic instrument to assess disability covering six domains. The purpose of this study was to investigate the potential of the instrument for monitoring disability in specialized somatic rehabilitation by testing reliability, construct validity and responsiveness of WHODAS 2.0, Norwegian version, among patients with various health conditions.MethodsFor taxonomy, terminology and definitions, the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments were followed. Reproducibility was investigated by the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) in a randomly selected sample. Internal consistency was assessed by Cronbach’s alpha. Construct validity was evaluated by correlations between WHODAS 2.0 and the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form, and fit of the hypothesized structure using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Responsiveness was evaluated in another randomly selected sample by testing a priori formulated hypotheses.ResultsNine hundred seventy patients were included in the study. Reproducibility and responsiveness were evaluated in 53 and 104 patients, respectively. The ICC for the WHODAS 2.0 domains ranged from 0.63 to 0.84 and was 0.87 for total score. Cronbach’s alpha for domains ranged from 0.75 to 0.94 and was 0.93 for total score. For construct validity, 6 of 12 expected correlations were confirmed and CFA did not achieve satisfactory fit indices. For responsiveness, 3 of 8 hypotheses were confirmed.ConclusionThe Norwegian version of WHODAS 2.0 showed moderate to satisfactory reliability and moderate validity in rehabilitation patients. However, the present study indicated possible limitations in terms of responsiveness.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Validation of World Health Organization Assessment Schedule 2.0 in specialized somatic rehabilitation services in Norway

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The tool meets Nunnally’s criteria, according to which for a good Cronbach’s alpha scale it must be >0.70 [ 43 ]. Similar reliability of the WHODAS 2.0 test was received by Silva et al while validating the Portuguese version of the 36-item WHODAS among 204 patients with musculoskeletal pain [ 26 ]. The authors of this article have confirmed the reliability of the WHODAS 2.0 by also examining 60–70 year-olds living in Poland, establishing Cronbach’s alpha for the whole scale on the level 0.89 and for individual domains it ranged from 0.85 to 0.86 [ 34 ].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 56%

“…In the studies of Serrano-Dueñas et al, the SEM for the WHODAS overall result slightly exceeded 50% of the measurement error (SEM = 51.7%) [ 66 ]. Silva et al, in their research, received the relatively small deviations of the SEM (2.94) and the MDC (8.15) indicated the good reliability of the 36-item WHODAS 2.0 summary score [ 26 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lee et al suggested that WHODAS 2.0 may be a useful measure for patients with LBP [ 25 ]. The scale was translated and validated among patients with musculoskeletal problems in various countries, including Portugal [ 26 ], Finland [ 27 ] and Turkey [ 28 ]. The WHODAS 2.0 might be among the best measures for assessing LBP disability, being the most supportive of the biopsychosocial disability model [ 29 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Psychometric Properties of the Polish Version of the 36-Item WHODAS 2.0 in Patients with Low Back Pain

Ćwirlej-Sozańska

Bejer

Wiśniowska-Szurlej

et al. 2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) is considered by the World Health Organization (WHO) to be a useful tool for assessing the functioning and disability of the general population as well as the effectiveness of the applied interventions. Until this study, no data regarding the validity of the 36-item WHODAS 2.0 in chronic low back pain (LBP) in Poland have been explored. This study was conducted on 92 patients suffering from chronic LBP admitted to the rehabilitation ward. The Polish version of the 36-item WHODAS 2.0, the Sf-36 Health Survey (SF-36), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) questionnaires were applied to assess patients. The scale score reliability of the entire tool for the study population was very high. The Cronbach’s alpha test result for the entire scale was 0.92. For the overall result of the WHODAS 2.0, the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC1,2) was 0.928, which confirmed that the scale was consistent over time. The total result and the vast majority of domains of the 36-item WHODAS 2.0 correlated negatively with domains of the SF-36 questionnaire; thus, a higher WHODAS 2.0 score was associated with a lower score on the SF-36 questionnaire. We found that the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the total WHODAS 2.0 score in patients after rehabilitation for LBP was 4.87. Overall, the results indicated that the Polish version of the 36-item WHODAS is suitable for assessing health and disability status in patients with LBP.

show abstract

“…It seems that measurements in rehabilitation and disability sciences are concentrated more on assessing the body structure and function (impairments severity), while activity and participation assessment can be more significant, understandable and advantageous for both patients and therapists, and moreover, the outcome measurements might have a more directly link to Qol ( 9 , 10 ). So, evaluating the disability would prepare a comprehensive profile of health conditions and functioning level, and determine the QoL ( 8 , 11 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Association Between Disability and Quality of Life in Multiple Sclerosis Patients in Ahvaz, Iran

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction:Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is a neurodegenerative and chronic disease of central nervous system which affected the middle aged people. The disabling nature of this disease can limit the daily activities, restrict the society roles, unemployment and finally lead to decline the quality of life (QoL) in MS patients. So, the main purpose of this study was to determine association between disability and quality of life among MS patients in Ahvaz, Iran.Materials and Methods:One hundred and one MS patients who living in Khouzestan participated in the cross-sectional study. Two questionnaires include the MSQoL-54 and World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0 (WHODAS2.0) were used in order to measure the QoL and disability severity. Descriptive statistics as well as Pearson correlation coefficient and simple linear regression were used to analysis the data.Results:The respondent rate was 100 percent. The disability showed a large and negative association with QoL (p<0.001) but QoL was not significantly associated with EDSS score. Social participation and cognition subscales recognized as QoL predictors according to simple regression results.Conclusion:The cognition and participation, disability subscales, were the most important predicators for QoL. Therefore, increasing employment opportunities, changing society’s attitude and using the psychotherapy programs might improve the MS patient’s QoL.

show abstract

Adaptacao e validacao do WHODAS 2.0 em utentes com dor musculoesqueletica

Cited by 41 publications

References 13 publications

Validation of World Health Organization Assessment Schedule 2.0 in specialized somatic rehabilitation services in Norway

Validation of World Health Organization Assessment Schedule 2.0 in specialized somatic rehabilitation services in Norway

Psychometric Properties of the Polish Version of the 36-Item WHODAS 2.0 in Patients with Low Back Pain

Association Between Disability and Quality of Life in Multiple Sclerosis Patients in Ahvaz, Iran

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About