Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Handbook of Vocational Rehabilitation and Disability Evaluation pp 453–469Cite as

Clinician-Reported Outcome Measures: Experiences from Multicenter Follow-Up and an Overview of Commonly Used Measures in Vocational Rehabilitation and Disability Evaluation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 3589 Accesses

Part of the book series: Handbooks in Health, Work, and Disability ((SHHDW))

Abstract

The ICF concept is highly relevant in work disability evaluations and in evaluating vocational rehabilitation. Since factors such as environmental aspects have a profound impact on the individual’s ability to perform at work, they need as much attention as other aspects related to the individual’s capacity. Using an ICF-based approach gives the opportunity to ensure that all important aspects that can contribute to work ability are covered and well described.

Work disability evaluations and follow-ups on vocational rehabilitation include different methods and perspectives. Often, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used. Today, many valid and reliable instruments are available in many languages. These instruments are also efficient and easy to administer but will be only briefly mentioned in some sections of this chapter, while the focus is on clinician reported instruments and tests.

Clinician-reported outcome measures (CROMs) are widely used as observational instruments but also as more advanced measuring methods. In this chapter, we present different CROMs, explicitly related to the different components of the ICF. We also offer suggestions on CROMs in relation to different health conditions with a special focus on musculoskeletal conditions. Furthermore, we share our experience from evaluation of a national rehabilitation program with a focus on return-to-work where observations on function based on the ICF were used.

We conclude that using ICF-based CROMs on function is convenient in clinical settings and also in more complex evaluations. There is, however, still need to assure the reliability and validity of these measures and to further develop this area.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. World Health Organization. International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems, 10th Revision 2010. Available at: http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/en/

  2. Pransky GS, Dempsey LG. Practical aspects of functional capacity evaluations. J Occup Rehabil. 2004;14:217–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Åstrand P-O, Rodahl K, Dahl HA, Strømme SB. Textbook of work physiology: physiological of bases of exercise. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Strijk JE, Proper KI, van Tralen MM, Wijngaard P, van Mechelen W, van der Beek AJ. The role of work ability in the relationship between aerobic capacity and sick leave: a mediation analysis. Occup Environ Med. 2011;68:753–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Mathiowetz V, Weber K, Volland G, Kashman N. Reliability and validity of grip and pinch strength evaluations. J Hand Surg Am. 1984;9(2):222–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Nordenskiöld UM, Grimby G. Grip force in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and fibromyalgia and in healthy subjects. A study with the Grippit instrument. Scand J Rheumatol. 1993;22(1):14–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Massy-Westropp N, Health M, Rankin W, Aern M, Krishnan J, Hearn TC. Measuring grip strength in normal adults: reference ranges and a comparison of electronic and hydraulic instruments. J Hand Surg. 2004;29(3):514–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. American Thoracic Society. ATS statement: guidelines for the six-minute-walk-test. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2003;166:111–7.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Nordeman L, Gunnarsson R, Mannerkorpi K. Prognostic factors for work ability in women with chronic low back pain consulting primary health care; a 2-year prospective longitudinal cohort study. Clin J Pain. 2014;28(1):65–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Haldorsen EM, Kronholm K, Skouen JS, Ursin H. Predictors for outcome of a multi-modal cognitive behavioural treatment program for low back pain patients – a 12-month follow-up study. Eur J Pain. 1998;2:293–307.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Rivilis I, van Eerd D, Cullen K, Cole DC, Irvin E, Tyson J, Mahood Q. Effectiveness of participatory ergonomic interventions on health outcomes: a systematic review. Appl Ergon. 2008;39(3):342–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gross DP, Battie MC, Asante AK. The Patient-Specific Functional Scale: validity in worker’s compensation claimants. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89:1294–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Reference guide to Quick Exposure Check. Cited: 14 Apr 2014. Available at: http://www.lni.wa.gov/Safety/Topics/Ergonomics/pdfs/QECReferenceGuide.pdf

  14. Sandqvist JL, Gullberg MT, Henriksson CM, Gerdle BU. Content validity and utility of the Assessment of Work Performance (AWP). Work. 2008;30(4):441–50.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kielhofner G. A model of human occupations. 5th ed. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Van Den Berg TI, Elders LA, De Zwart BC, Burdorf A. The effects of work-related and individual factors on the Work Ability Index: a systematic review. Occup Environ Med. 2009;66:211–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lidwall U, Bergendorff S, Voss M, Marklund S. Long term sickness absence: changes in risk factors and the population at risk. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2009;22(2):157–68.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bevan S, McGee R, Quadrello T. Fit for work? Musculoskeletal disorders in Sweden. The work foundation. 2009. www.fitforworkeurope.eu

  19. Ndosi M, Bremander A, Hamnes B, Horton M, Kukkurainen ML, Machado P, Marques A, Meesters J, Stamm TA, Tennant A, de la Torre-Aboki J, Vliet Vlieland TP, Zangi HA, Hill J. Validation of the educational needs assessment tool as a generic instrument for rheumatic diseases in seven European countries. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013. Aug 6. [Epub ahead of print].

    Google Scholar 

  20. Brouwer S, Franche RL, Hogg-Johnson S, Lee H, Krause N, Shaw WS. Return-to-work self-efficacy: development and validation of a scale in claimants with musculoskeletal disorders. J Occup Rehabil. 2011;21:234–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Richard S, Dionne CE, Nouwen A. Self-efficacy and health locus of control: relationship to occupational disability among workers with back pain. J Occup Rehabil. 2011;21:421–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Labriola M, Lund T, Christiensen KB, Albertsen K, Bultmann U, Jensen JN, Villadsen E. Does self-efficacy predict return-to-work after sickness absence? A prospective study among 930 employees with sickness absence for three weeks or more. Work. 2007;29:233–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hubertsson J, Englund M, Hallgårde U, Lidwall U, Löfvendahl S, Petersson IF. Sick leave patterns in common musculoskeletal disorders – a study of doctor prescribed sick leave. BMC Musculoskeletal; May 24, 2014;15:176.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Uhlig T, Moe R, Reinsberg S, Kvien TK, Cieza A, Stucki G. Responsiveness of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) Core Set for rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2009;68(6):879–84. doi:10.1136/ard.2008.088708. Epub 2008 Jul 14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Eberhardt KB, Svensson B, Moritz U. Functional assessment of early rheumatoid arthritis. Br J Rheumatol. 1988;27(5):364–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Bremander AB, Petersson IF, Roos EM. Validation of the Rheumatoid and Arthritis Outcome Score (RAOS) for the lower extremity. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003;1(1):55.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Eurenius E, Stenström CH. Physical activity, physical fitness, and general health perception among individuals with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2005;53(1):48–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hagel S, Lindqvist E, Petersson IF, Nilsson JÅ, Bremander A. Validation of outcome measurement instruments used in a multidisciplinary rehabilitation intervention for patients with chronic inflammatory arthritis – linkage to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), construct validity and responsiveness to change. J Rehabil Med. 2011;43(5):411–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Fries J. The hierarchy of quality-of-life assessment, the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), and issues mandating development of a toxicity index. Control Clin Trials. 1991;12(4 Suppl):106S–17.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Haglund E, Bergman S, Petersson IF, Jacobsson L, Strömbeck B, Bremander A. Differences in physical activity patterns in patients with spondyloarthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2013;65:492

    Google Scholar 

  31. Hagel S, Lindqvist E, Bremander A, Petersson IF. Team-based rehabilitation improves long-term aerobic capacity and health-related quality of life in patients with chronic inflammatory arthritis. Disabil Rehabil. 2010;32(20):1686–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Paradowski PT, Bergman S, Sundén-Lundius A, Lohmander LS, Roos EM. Knee complaints vary with age and gender in the adult population. Population-based reference data for the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2006;7:38.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Bremander AB, Dahl LL, Roos EM. Validity and reliability of functional performance tests in meniscectomized patients with or without knee osteoarthritis. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2007;17(2):120–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Hill JC, et al. Comparison of stratified primary care management for low back pain with current best practice (STarT Back): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2011;378(9802):1560–71.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Jensen I, Wåhlin C, Dahlgren M, Hjalmársson L, Ziemelis S, Blomquist P, Hagström R, Berndtsson A, Nordrup E, Ivarsson Walther R, McKeogh M, Carlstedt-Duke B, Stigmar K, Rahm L, Eden L. Riktlinjer vid ländryggsbesvär. En sammanställning från Företagshälsans riktlinjegrupp 1/2013. Cited: 2 Apr 2014. Available at: http://www.foretagshalsor.se/sites/default/files/fsf/Filer/riktlinjer_vid_landryggsbesvar_utgava_2.pdf (in Swedish).

  36. Rehabiliteringsgarantin – En rapport från Inspektionen för socialförsäkringen. Rapport 2012:17, Stockholm. 2012;17:10–11 (Summary in English). www.inspsf.se

  37. WHO. Comprehensive ICF core set for chronic wide-spread pain. Cited: 11 Mar 2014. Available at: http://www.icf-research-branch.org/download/finish/8-musculoskeletal-conditions/169-comprehensive-icf-core-sets-for-chronic-widespread-pain

  38. WHO. Comprehensive ICF core set for depression. Cited: 4 Mar 2014. Available at: http://www.icf-research-branch.org/images/stories/ICF%20Core%20Sets%20Download/Comprehensive_ and_Brief_ICF_Core_Sets_Depression.pdf

  39. Cieza A, Stucki G. Content comparison of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) instruments based on the international classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF). Qual Life Res. 2005;14(5):12225–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Stigmar KE, Petersson IF, Jöud A, Grahn B. Promoting work ability in a structured national rehabilitation program in patients with musculoskeletal disorders: outcomes and predictors in a prospective cohort study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013;14:57.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Busch H, Bonnevier H, Hagberg J, Lohela Karlsson M, Bodin L, Norlund A, Jensen I. En nationell utvärdering av rehabiliteringsgarantins effekter på sjukfrånvaro och hälsa. Slutrapport del1. Enheten för interventions- och implementeringsforskning, Institutet för miljömedicin (IMM), Karolinska Institutet. Stockholm 2011 (in Swedish).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Epidemiology and Register Centre South, Skånes universitetssjukhus, Medicon Village, Tunavägen 22, 223 81, Lund, Sweden

    Ingemar F Petersson, Birgitta Grahn & Kjerstin Stigmar

  2. Lund University, Lund, Sweden

    Ingemar F Petersson, Birgitta Grahn & Kjerstin Stigmar

  3. Department of Health Sciences, Division of Physiotherapy, Lund University, Lund, Sweden

    Birgitta Grahn & Kjerstin Stigmar

Authors
  1. Ingemar F Petersson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Birgitta Grahn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kjerstin Stigmar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ingemar F Petersson .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Rehabilitation and Movement Science, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont, USA

    Reuben Escorpizo

  2. Research Unit, Directorate for Labour and Welfare, Oslo, Oslo, Norway

    Sören Brage

  3. Department of Rehabilitation and Counsel, University of Wisconsin-Stout, Menomonie, Wisconsin, USA

    Debra Homa

  4. Department of Health Sciences and Health Policy, University of Lucerne, Lucerne, Luzern, Switzerland

    Gerold Stucki

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Petersson, I.F., Grahn, B., Stigmar, K. (2015). Clinician-Reported Outcome Measures: Experiences from Multicenter Follow-Up and an Overview of Commonly Used Measures in Vocational Rehabilitation and Disability Evaluation. In: Escorpizo, R., Brage, S., Homa, D., Stucki, G. (eds) Handbook of Vocational Rehabilitation and Disability Evaluation. Handbooks in Health, Work, and Disability. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08825-9_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08825-9_21

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-08824-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-08825-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation