RééDOC
75 Boulevard Lobau
54042 NANCY cedex

Christelle Grandidier Documentaliste
03 83 52 67 64


F Nous contacter

0

Article

--";3! O
     

-A +A

A systematic review of assessment tools for adults used in traumatic brain injury research and their relationship to the ICF

TATE RL; GODBEE K; SIGMUNDSDOTTIR L
NEUROREHABILITATION , 2013, vol. 32, n° 4, p. 729-750
Doc n°: 167136
Localisation : Centre de Réadaptation de Lay St Christophe

D.O.I. : http://dx.doi.org/DOI:10.3233/NRE-130898
Descripteurs : AF3 - TRAUMATISME CRANIEN, JQ - CIF

Good assessment is an essential component of effective
patient management. Yet the sheer volume of available assessment instruments
presents a barrier for the clinician or researcher to (a) be knowledgeable about
suitable measures and (b) keep up-to-date with new measures that are published.
In order to create a resource of currently-used measures,
we conducted a
systematic review of assessment tools used in the research literature on
traumatic brain injury (TBI). METHODS: We used two electronic databases (Medline
and PsycINFO) to identify full-length, English-language articles published
between 2000 and 2012 in which outcome in adults with TBI was assessed with
behavioural tests or questionnaires. RESULTS: The searches yielded 5,735 articles
and after deletion of duplicates (n = 1,383) and articles not meeting selection
criteria (n = 1,759), 2,593 articles were further examined. The articles
contained 910 behavioural instruments, with a final set of 728 unique
instruments. Each instrument was classified against the International
Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Half of the
instruments (n = 370, 50.8%) evaluated the mental functions domain of the ICF
body functions component, with a substantially smaller proportion (n = 64, 8.8%)
examining specific motor-sensory and other body functions. Instruments also
covered domains of activities/participation (n = 109, 15.0%), environmental
factors (n = 22, 3.0%) and personal factors (n = 36, 4.9%). A substantial number
of scales (n = 93, 12.8%) were multidimensional across the body function domains
(n = 32), as well as the functioning and disability part of the ICF (n = 60). The
remaining 5% of instruments addressed concepts not covered by the ICF, including
quality of life (n = 19, 2.6%) and rehabilitation process tools (such as
therapeutic alliance). The 728 instruments were listed and more than 70 of the
most common, spread across 20 domains, were highlighted. CONCLUSION: These data
provide a comprehensive and up-to-date resource that gives the researcher or
clinician a very large selection of assessment instruments covering the major areas of function pertinent to TBI.

Langue : ANGLAIS

Mes paniers

4

Gerer mes paniers

0