The development of a handicap assessment questionnaire: the Impact on Participation and Autonomy (IPA)

Cardol, Mieke; Haan, Rob J. de; Bos, G.A.M. van den; Jong, B. A. De; Groot, I. de

doi:10.1191/026921599668601325

Cited by 318 publications

(318 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

293

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It includes subscales of social relations, autonomy in self-care, mobility and leisure, family role, and work and educational opportunities. Studies have supported its reliability, validity, and factor structure among persons with SCI [18,[68][69][70]. Limitations of the IPA include some floor and ceiling effects and relatively less use empirically than other activity and participation measures [15,71].…”

Section: Participation Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The IPA is a 32-item measure designed to assess perceived participation and participation restrictions from the point of view of persons with disability [18]. It includes subscales of social relations, autonomy in self-care, mobility and leisure, family role, and work and educational opportunities.…”

Section: Participation Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Three measures met criteria of having been used with people with SCI, cited in literature between 2000 and 2007, and used by two or more research groups. The three measures that met these criteria were the Craig Handicap Assessment and Reporting Technique (CHART) [16], the Assessment of Life Habits (LIFE-H) [17], and the Impact on Participation and Autonomy (IPA) questionnaire [18] (Table 1). However, the authors noted that existing measures are inadequate for addressing the person-environment interaction inherent to participation and that some measures give no consideration to personal values.…”

Section: Overview Of Recent Literature On Activity and Participation mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Activity and participation after spinal cord injury: State-of-the-art report

Ullrich¹,

Spungen²,

Atkinson³

et al. 2012

JRRD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-The importance of activities and community participation for persons with spinal cord injury (SCI) has been recognized for decades and yet theoretical and empirical advances have been limited. This report summarizes the recommendations for researchers on the topic of measuring activity and participation among persons with SCI formulated by the Spinal Cord Injury workgroup at the State-of-the-Art Conference on Outcome Measures in Rehabilitation held in January 2010. Activity and participation were defined as independent constructs ideally measured in reference to personal values and environmental influences. Measures of activity, participation, and factors influencing activity and participation are reviewed and critiqued. Gaps in available measures are described, measures in development are discussed, and suggestions for future research are made.

show abstract

Section: Participation Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Participation Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Overview Of Recent Literature On Activity and Participation mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Activity and participation after spinal cord injury: State-of-the-art report

Ullrich¹,

Spungen²,

Atkinson³

et al. 2012

JRRD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Four years after the injury a letter was sent to each patient at home, asking them to complete 4 questionnaires: EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), a self-report of health-related quality of life, consisting of 5 domains (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/ depression) (12), to which is added a visual analogue scale (VAS) for evaluation of perceived health-related quality of life, where 0 = worst imaginable health status and 100 = best imaginable health status; the European Brain Injury Questionnaire (EBIQ), a self-report measure for persons who are brain injured, that measures the subjective experience of cognitive, emotional and social difficulties (13); the Impact on Participation and Autonomy Questionnaire (IPA) (14), a questionnaire with 39 items measuring participation in accordance with the definition set out in the ICF; and a questionnaire from the Swedish Stroke Register (http://www.riks-stroke.org/index.php?content=form) concerning living conditions, activities of daily living and support (modified so that the questions started with "since your brain injury…"). Demographic data and severity of the trauma, according to the Reaction Level Scale (RLS) (15), were gathered from medical charts.…”

Section: Procedures and Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Factors affecting participation after traumatic brain injury

Larsson¹,

Björkdahl²,

Esbjörnsson³

et al. 2013

J Rehabil Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The aim of this work was to explore the extent to which social, cognitive, emotional and physical aspects influence participation after a traumatic brain injury. Design/subjects: An explorative study of the patient perspective of participation 4 years after traumatic brain injury. The cohort consisted of all patients (age range 18-65 years), presenting in 1999-2000, admitted to the hospital (n = 129). Sixty-three patients responded; 46 males and 17 females, mean age 41 (range 19-60) years. Methods: Four years after the injury, the European Brain Injury Questionnaire (EBIQ), EuroQol-5D, Swedish Stroke Register Questionnaire and Impact on Participation and Autonomy (IPA) questionnaire were sent to the sample. Data were analysed with logistic regression. Results: On the EBIQ, 40% of the sample reported problems in most questions. According to IPA, between 20% and 40% did not perceive that they had a good participation. The analyses gave 5 predictors reflecting emotional and social aspects, which could explain up to 70% of the variation in participation. Conclusion: It is not easy to find single predictors, as there seems to be a close interaction between several aspects. Motor deficits appear to have smaller significance for participation in this late state, while emotional and social factors play a major role.

show abstract

“…A number of new tools have recently been proposed to assess participation [16,[21][22][23][24]. When comparing these tools, it is apparent that there is a lack of consensus on the range of domains to be measured [2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring participation in people living with multiple sclerosis: A comparison of self-reported frequency, importance and self-efficacy

Yorkston

Kuehn

Johnson

et al. 2008

Disability and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose-To compare three dimensions related to participation in everyday situations in community-dwelling adults with multiple sclerosis (MS).Methods-Mail survey was obtained from 112 respondents. Data were analyzed using Kendall's tau-b correlation coefficients between responses to participation items relative to three question dimensions (importance, frequency, and self-efficacy) and criterion variables (mobility, depression, general health, fatigue and pain).Results-No significant associations were found between item responses in the importance dimension and the criterion variables. Weak associations were found for items in the frequency dimension, and stronger associations were found for items in the self-efficacy dimension.Conclusions-Different dimensions of participation in specific life situations yielded different responses and associations of those responses with key criterion measures. Subjective importance of participating in everyday situations is relatively independent of measures of mobility, general health, depression, fatigue and pain. Subjective judgments of self-efficacy for participation are more closely linked to these criterion measures. Caution is warranted when interpreting scales of participation because participation is a complex construct, potentially composed of several dimensions.

show abstract

The development of a handicap assessment questionnaire: the Impact on Participation and Autonomy (IPA)

Abstract: The first results suggest that the IPA promises to be a useful handicap questionnaire. Further research is needed to establish test-retest reliability, convergent validity and responsiveness to change.

Cited by 318 publications

References 23 publications

Activity and participation after spinal cord injury: State-of-the-art report

Activity and participation after spinal cord injury: State-of-the-art report

Factors affecting participation after traumatic brain injury

Measuring participation in people living with multiple sclerosis: A comparison of self-reported frequency, importance and self-efficacy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About