Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Hanteerbaarheid van een meetinstrument

  • Chapter
Meten in de praktijk

  • 4786 Accesses

Naast de methodologische kwaliteit (zie hoofdstukken 6 en 7) is voor de dagelijkse praktijk de hanteerbaarheid (ook wel gebruiksvriendelijkheid genoemd) van een meetinstrument van belang. Stap 5 van het stappenplan gaat hierover (zie figuur 5.1).

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatuur

  1. Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust. Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res 2002;11:193–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health Measurement Scales. A practical guide to their development and use. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Romsing J, Hertel S, Moller-Sonnergaard J, Rasmussen M. Postoperative pain in Danish children: self-report measures of pain intensity. J Pediatr Nurs 1996;11:119–124.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Van Cleve LJ, Savedra MC. Pain location: validity and reliability of body outline markings by 4 to 7-year-old children who are hospitalized. Pediatr Nurs 1993;19:217–220.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Wong DL, Baker CM. Pain in children: comparison of assessment scales. Pediatr Nurs 1988;14:9–17.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Duff L, Louw G, McClarey M. Clinical guideline for the recognition and assessment of acute pain in children. Paediatr Nurs 1999;11:18–21.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. McGrath PA, Seifert CE, Speechley KN, Booth JC, Stitt L, Gibson MC. A new analogue scale for assessing children's pain: an initial validation study. Pain 1996;64:435–443.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Carr, DB, Jacox AK, Chapman CG. Acute Pain Management: Operative or Medical procedures and Trauma. Clinical Practice Guideline No.1. Rockville (MD): Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, Public Health Service (US), Department of Health and Human Services. 1992. AHCPR Pub. No. 92-0032

    Google Scholar 

  9. Herr KA, Spratt K, Mobily PR, Richardson G. Pain intensity assessment in older adults: use of experimental pain to compare psychometric properties and usability of selected pain scales with younger adults. Clin J Pain 2004;20:207–219.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Herr KA, Mobily PR, Kohout FJ, Wagenaar D. Evaluation of the Faces Pain Scale for use with the elderly. Clin J Pain 1998;14:29–38.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. American Geriatrics Society Panel on Persistent Pain in Older Persons. Clinical practice guidelines: The management of persistent pain in older persons. J. Am Geriatr Soc 2002;50(6 Suppl):S205–S224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Auger C, Demers L, Swaine B. Making sense of pragmatic criteria for the selection of geriatric rehabilitation measurement tools. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 2006;43:65–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Turner RR, Quittner AL, Parasuraman BM, Kallich JD, Cleeland CS. Patient-reported outcomes: instrument development and selection issues. Value.Health 2007;10 Suppl 2:S86–S93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Grunau RE, Oberlander T, Holsti L, Whitfield MF. Bedside application of the Neonatal Facial Coding System in pain assessment of premature neonates. Pain 1998;76:277–286.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Fuchs-Lacelle S, Hadjistavropoulos T. Development and preliminary validation of the pain assessment checklist for seniors with limited ability to communicate (PACSLAC). Pain Manag Nurs 2004;5:37–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wary B, Collectif Doloplus. Doloplus-2, une échelle pour évaluer la douleur. Soins Gerontol 1999;19:25–27.[Frans]

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Zwakhalen SM, Hamers JP, Abu-Saad HH, Berger MP. Pain in elderly people with severe dementia: a systematic review of behavioural pain assessment tools. BMC Geriatr 2006;6:3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Heller A, Wade DT, Wood VA, Sunderland A, Hewer RL, Ward E. Arm function after stroke: measurement and recovery over the first three months. J Neurol.Neurosurg Psychiatry 1987;50:714–719.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. American College of Sports Medicine. Guidelines for exercise testing and prescription. 6th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Shephard RJ. PAR-Q, Canadian Home Fitness Test and exercise screening alternatives. Sports Med 1988;5:185–195.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Thomas S, Reading J, Shephard RJ. Revision of the Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q). Can J Sport Sci. 1992;17:338–345.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Borg GA. Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1982;14:377–381.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Morree JJ de, Jongert MWA, Poel G van der. Inspanningsfysiologie oefentherapie en training. Houten: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Vogels EMHM, Bertram RJJ, Graus JJJ, Hendriks HJM, Hulst R van, Hulzebos RJ et al. KNGF-richtlijn Hartrevalidatie. Nederlands Tijdschr Fysioth 2001;111(3:Supplement):1–54.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Bellamy N, Muirden KD, Brooks PM, Barraclough D, Tellus MM, Campbell J. A survey of outcome measurement procedures in routine rheumatology outpatient practice in Australia. J Rheumatol 1999;26:1593–1599.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Terluin B. De vierdimensionale klachtenlijst (4DKL); een vragenlijst voor het meten van distress, depressie, angst en somatisatie. Huisarts Wet 1996;39:538–547.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Terluin B. Wat meet de Vierdimensionale Klachtenlijst (4DKL) in vergelijking met enkele bekende klachtenlijsten? Tijdschr Gezondheidswet 1998;76:435–441.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Guyatt GH, Pugsley SO, Sullivan MJ, Thompson PJ, Berman L, Jones NL et al. Effect of encouragement on walking test performance. Thorax 1984;39:818–822.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne C. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992;30:473–483.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Piper MC, Pinnell LE, Darrah J, Maguire T, Byrne PJ. Construction and validation of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS). Can.J Public Health 1992;83 Suppl 2:S46–S50.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Lyle RC. A performance test for assessment of upper limb function in physical rehabilitation treatment and research. Int J Rehabil Res 1981;4:483–492.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 2000;25:3186–3191.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Berg K, Wood-Dauphinee S, Williams JL, Gayton D. Measuring balance in the elderly: Preliminary development of an instrument. Physiotherapy Canada 1989;41:304–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Tarlov AR, Ware JE Jr, Greenfield S, Nelson EC, Perrin E, Zubkoff M. The Medical Outcomes Study. An application of methods for monitoring the results of medical care. JAMA 1989;262:925–930

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Lundberg MK, Styf J, Carlsson SG. A psychometric evaluation of the Swedish version of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK) from a physiotherapeutic perspective. Physiother Theory Pract 2004;20:121–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Wade DT, Wood VA, Heller A, Maggs J, Langton HR. Walking after stroke. Measurement and recovery over the first 3 months. Scand J Rehabil Med 1987;19:25–30.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Duncan PW, Weiner DK, Chandler J, Studenski S. Functional reach: a new clinical measure of balance. J Gerontol 1990;45:M192–M197.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Smits-Engelsman BCM, Bekkering GE, Hendriks HJM. KNGF-richtlijn Osteoporose. Tijdschr voor Fysiother 2001;111(3:Supplement):1–36.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Wasserman K. Principles of Exercise Testing and Interpretation. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  40. ATS Committee on Proficiency Standards for Clinical Pulmonary Function Laboratories. ATS statement: guidelines for the six-minute walk test. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002;166:111–117.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Sciurba F, Criner GJ, Lee SM, Mohsenifar Z, Shade D, Slivka W et al. Six-minute walk distance in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: reproducibility and effect of walking course layout and length. Am J Respir. Crit Care Med 2003;167:1522–1527.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Brooks D, Solway S, Gibbons WJ. ATS statement on six-minute walk test. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2003;167:1287.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Casanova C, Cote CG, Marin JM, de Torrs JP, Aguirre-Jaime A, Mendez R et al. The 6-min walking distance: long-term follow up in patients with COPD. Eur. Respir J 2007;29:535–540.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Riddle DL, Stratford PW. Interpreting validity indexes for diagnostic tests: an illustration using the Berg balance test. Phys Ther 1999;79:939–948.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Meta Wildenbeest
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Harriët Wittink
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 2008 Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wildenbeest, M., Wittink, H. (2008). Hanteerbaarheid van een meetinstrument. In: Meten in de praktijk. Bohn Stafleu van Loghum, Houten. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-313-6557-9_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-313-6557-9_5

  • Publisher Name: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum, Houten

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-313-5074-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-90-313-6557-9

  • eBook Packages: Dutch language eBook collection

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation