Identification of candidate categories of the International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health (ICF) for a Generic ICF Core Set based on regression modelling

Alarcos Cieza, Szilvia Geyh, Somnath Chatterji, Nenad Kostanjsek, Bedirhan T Ustün, Gerold Stucki, Alarcos Cieza, Szilvia Geyh, Somnath Chatterji, Nenad Kostanjsek, Bedirhan T Ustün, Gerold Stucki

Abstract

Background: The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) is the framework developed by WHO to describe functioning and disability at both the individual and population levels.While condition-specific ICF Core Sets are useful, a Generic ICF Core Set is needed to describe and compare problems in functioning across health conditions.

Methods: The aims of the multi-centre, cross-sectional study presented here were: a) to propose a method to select ICF categories when a large amount of ICF-based data have to be handled, and b) to identify candidate ICF categories for a Generic ICF Core Set by examining their explanatory power in relation to item one of the SF-36. The data were collected from 1039 patients using the ICF checklist, the SF-36 and a Comorbidity Questionnaire.ICF categories to be entered in an initial regression model were selected following systematic steps in accordance with the ICF structure. Based on an initial regression model, additional models were designed by systematically substituting the ICF categories included in it with ICF categories with which they were highly correlated.

Results: Fourteen different regression models were performed. The variance the performed models account for ranged from 22.27% to 24.0%. The ICF category that explained the highest amount of variance in all the models was sensation of pain. In total, thirteen candidate ICF categories for a Generic ICF Core Set were proposed.

Conclusion: The selection strategy based on the ICF structure and the examination of the best possible alternative models does not provide a final answer about which ICF categories must be considered, but leads to a selection of suitable candidates which needs further consideration and comparison with the results of other selection strategies in developing a Generic ICF Core Set.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The current framework of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Inter-correlated ICF categories in chapter 1 mental functions. Values next to the arrows represent the inter-correlations of the ICF categories. Values between brackets and cursive represent the correlation of the corresponding ICF category with item 1 of the SF-36.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Inter-correlated ICF categories in the component body functions and activities and participation. The discontinued arrows refer to inter-correlations among/between the ICF categories that belong to the same ICF chapter. The continued arrows refer to inter-correlations of ICF categories from different chapters. Values next to the arrows represent the inter-correlations of the ICF categories. Values between brackets and cursive represent the correlation of the corresponding ICF category with item 1 of the SF-36.

References

    1. Cieza A, Geyh S, Chatterji S, Kostanjsek N, Ustun B, Stucki G. ICF linking rules: an update based on lessons learned. J Rehabil Med. 2005;37:212–8. doi: 10.1080/16501970510040263.
    1. Stucki G. International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF): a promising framework and classification for rehabilitation medicine. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;84:733–40. doi: 10.1097/01.phm.0000179521.70639.83.
    1. Disler PB, Roy CW, Smith BP. Predicting hours of care needed. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993;74:139–43.
    1. Granger CV, Cotter AC, Hamilton BB, Fiedler RC. Functional assessment scales: a study of persons after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993;74:133–8.
    1. Feigenson JS, McDowell FH, Meese P, McCarthy ML, Greenberg SD. Factors influencing outcome and length of stay in a stroke rehabilitation unit. Part 1. Analysis of 248 unscreened patients – medical and functional prognostic indicators. Stroke. 1977;8:651–6.
    1. Ween JE, Mernoff ST, Alexander MP. Recovery rates after stroke and their impact on outcome prediction. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2000;14:229–35.
    1. Franchignoni F, Tesio L, Martino MT, Benevolo E, Castagna M. Length of stay of stroke rehabilitation inpatients: prediction through the functional independence measure. Ann Ist Super Sanita. 1998;34:463–7.
    1. Harvey RL, Roth EJ, Heinemann AW, Lovell LL, McGuire JR, Diaz S. Stroke rehabilitation: clinical predictors of resource utilization. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1998;79:1349–55. doi: 10.1016/S0003-9993(98)90226-X.
    1. New PW. Functional outcomes and disability after nontraumatic spinal cord injury rehabilitation: Results from a retrospective study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86:250–61. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2004.04.028.
    1. Bode RK, Heinemann AW. Course of functional improvement after stroke, spinal cord injury, and traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83:100–6. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2002.26073.
    1. World Health Organization . International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. ICF Geneva: WHO; 2001.
    1. Stucki G, Ewert T, Cieza A. Value and application of the ICF in rehabilitation medicine. Disabil Rehabil. 2002;20;24:932–8. doi: 10.1080/09638280210148594.
    1. Cieza A, Stucki G. Understanding functioning, disability, and health in rheumatoid arthritis: the basis for rehabilitation care. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2005;17:183–9. doi: 10.1097/01.bor.0000151405.56769.e4.
    1. World Health Assembly Resolution on ICF Downloaded: February 1st, 2006.
    1. Ustun B, Chatterji S, Kostanjsek N. Comments from WHO for the Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine Special Supplement on ICF Core Sets. J Rehabil Med. 2004:7–8.
    1. Stucki G, Grimby G. Applying the ICF in medicine. J Rehabil Med. 2004:5–6. doi: 10.1080/16501960410022300.
    1. Guyatt GH, Feeny DH, Patrick DL. Measuring health-related quality of life. Ann Intern Med. 1993;118:622–9.
    1. Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). A. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care. 1992;30:473–83. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199206000-00002.
    1. Ware JE, Kosinski M, Dewey JE. How to Score Version 2 of the SF-36® Health Survey. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Incorporated; 2000.
    1. Ewert T, Fuessl M, Cieza A, Andersen C, Chatterji S, Kostanjsek N, Stucki G. Identification of the most common patient problems in patients with chronic conditions using the ICF checklist. J Rehabil Med. 2004:22–9. doi: 10.1080/16501960410015362.
    1. World Health Organization ICF Checklist Version 2.1a, Clinical Form for International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF. WHO Geneva. 2001.
    1. Sangha O, Stucki G, Liang MH, Fossel AH, Katz JN. The Self-Administered Comorbidity Questionnaire: a new method to assess comorbidity for clinical and health services research. Arthritis Rheum. 2003;15;49:156–63. doi: 10.1002/art.10993.
    1. Hartley H. Maximum likelihood estimation from incomplete data. Biometrics. 1958;14:174–194. doi: 10.2307/2527783.
    1. White H. A Heteroscedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroscedasticity. Econometrica. 1980;48:817–38. doi: 10.2307/1912934.
    1. Long JS, Ervin LH. Using heteroscedasticity consistent standard errors in the linear regression model. The American Statistician. 2000;54:217–224. doi: 10.2307/2685594.
    1. MacKinnon JG, White H. Some heteroscedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimators with improved finite sample properties. Journal of Econometrics. 1985;29:305–325. doi: 10.1016/0304-4076(85)90158-7.
    1. White H. A heteroscedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroscedasticity. Econometrica. 1980;48:817–838. doi: 10.2307/1912934.
    1. Hayes AF. Statistical Methods for Communication Science. Mahwah NJ: Erlbaum; 2005.
    1. 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;14:1225–37. doi: 10.1007/s11136-004-4773-0.
    1. Cieza A, Ewert T, Ustun TB, Chatterji S, Kostanjsek N, Stucki G. Development of ICF Core Sets for patients with chronic conditions. J Rehabil Med. 2004:9–11.
    1. WHO Mental Bulletin A newsletter on noncommunicable diseases and mental health. WHO Mental Health Bulletin. 2000;6
    1. 2001. Downloaded: February 21st.
    1. Fox J. Applied Regression Analysis, Linear Models, and Related Methods. Newbury Park: Sage; 1997.
    1. WHO Technical Report Series, No. 919 . The Burden of Musculoskeletal Conditions at the start of the New Millenium. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2003.
    1. Van der Heijde D, Bellamy N, Calin A, Dougados M, Khan AM, van der Linden S. Preliminary core sets for endpoints in ankylosing spondylitis. J Rheumatol. 1997;24:2225–9.
    1. Dworkin RH, Turk DC, Farrar JT, Haythornthwaite JA, Jensen MP, Katz NP, Kerns RD, Stucki G, Allen RR, Bellamy N, Carr DB, Chandler J, Cowan P, Dionne R, Galer BS, Hertz S, Jadad AR, Kramer LD, Manning DC, Martin S, McCormick CG, McDermott MP, McGrath P, Quessy S, Rappaport BA, Robbins W, Robinson JP, Rothman M, Royal MA, Simon L, Stauffer JW, Stein W, Tollett J, Wernicke J, Witter J, IMMPACT Core outcome measures forchronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. Pain. 2005;113:9–19. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2004.09.012.
    1. Deyo RA, Battie M, Beurskens AJ, Bombardier C, Croft P, Koes B, Malmivaara A, Roland M, Von Korff M, Waddell G. Outcome Measures for Low Back Pain Research. A Proposal for Standardized Use. Spine. 1998;23:2000–2013. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199809150-00018.
    1. Bombardier C. Outcome assessments in the evaluation of treatment of spinal disorders: summary and general recommendations. Spine. 2000;15;25:3100–3103. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00003.
    1. Ehrlich GE, Khaltaev NG. Low back pain initiative. Department ofNoncommunicable Diesease Management. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1999.
    1. Bellamy N, Kirwan J, Boers M, Brooks P, Strand V, Tugwell P, Altman R, Brandt K, Dougados M, Lequesne M. Recommendations for a core set of outcome measures for future phase III clinical trials in knee, hip, and hand osteoarthritis. Consensus development at OMERACT III. J Rheumatol. 1997;24:799–802.
    1. Boers M, Tugwell P, Felson DT, van Riel PL, Kirwan JR, Edmonds JP, Smolen JS, Khaltaev N, Muirden KD. World Health Organisation and international league of associations for rheumatology core endpoints for symptom modifying antirheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. J Rheumatol Suppl. 1994;41:86–9.
    1. Felson DT, Anderson JJ, Boers M, Bombardier C, Chernoff M, Fried B, Furst D, Goldsmith C, Kieszak S, Lightfoot R, Paulus H, Tugwell P, Weinblatt M, Widmark R, Williams HJ, Wolfe F. The American College of Rheumatology preliminary core set of disease activity measures for rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. The Committee on Outcome Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials. Arthritis Rheum. 1993;36:729–40.
    1. Tugwell P, Boers M. Developing consensus on preliminary core efficacy endpoints for rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. OMERACT Committee. J Rheumatol. 1993;20:555–6.
    1. Bullinger M, Kirchberger I. Der SF-36 Fragebogen zum Gesundheitszustand. Handbuch für die Deutschsprachige Fragebogenversion. Göttingen, Bern, Toronto, Seattle: Hogrefe Verlag für Psychologie; 1998.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors en medewerkers

Medische omstandigheden

Geneesmiddelinterventies

3
Abonneren