Development of a clinical tool for rating the body function categories of the ICF generic-30/rehabilitation set in Japanese rehabilitation practice and examination of its interrater reliability.
Clinical tool
International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health
Interrater reliability
Rehabilitation
Journal
BMC medical research methodology
ISSN: 1471-2288
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Res Methodol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968545
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 06 2021
14 06 2021
Historique:
received:
24
12
2020
accepted:
27
04
2021
entrez:
15
6
2021
pubmed:
16
6
2021
medline:
29
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) Generic-30 (Rehabilitation) Set is a tool used to assess the functioning of a clinical population in rehabilitation. The ICF Generic-30 consists of nine ICF categories from the component "body functions" and 21 from the component "activities and participation". This study aimed to develop a rating reference guide for the nine body function categories of the ICF Generic-30 Set using a predefined, structured process and to examine the interrater reliability of the ratings using the rating reference guide. The development of the first version of the rating reference guide involved the following steps: (1) a trial of rating patients by several raters; (2) cognitive interviews with each rater to analyze the thought process involved in each rating; (3) the drafting of the rating reference guide by a multidisciplinary panel; and (4) a review by ICF specialists to confirm consistency with the ICF. Subsequently, we conducted a first field test to gain insight into the use of the guide in practice. The reference guide was modified based on the raters' feedback in the field test, and an inter-rater reliability test was conducted thereafter. Interrater agreement was evaluated using weighted kappa statistics with linear weights. The first version of the rating reference guide was successfully developed and tested. The weighted kappa coefficient in the field testing ranged from 0.25 to 0.92. The interrater reliability testing of the rating reference guide modified based on the field test results yielded an improved weighted kappa coefficient ranging from 0.53 to 0.78. Relative improvements in the weighted kappa coefficients were observed in seven out of the nine categories. Consequently, seven out of nine categories were found to have a weighted kappa coefficient of 0.61 or higher. In this study, we developed and modified a rating reference guide for the body function categories of the ICF Generic-30 Set. The interrater reliability test using the final version of the rating reference guide showed moderate to substantial interrater agreement, which encouraged the use of the ICF in rehabilitation practice.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) Generic-30 (Rehabilitation) Set is a tool used to assess the functioning of a clinical population in rehabilitation. The ICF Generic-30 consists of nine ICF categories from the component "body functions" and 21 from the component "activities and participation". This study aimed to develop a rating reference guide for the nine body function categories of the ICF Generic-30 Set using a predefined, structured process and to examine the interrater reliability of the ratings using the rating reference guide.
METHODS
The development of the first version of the rating reference guide involved the following steps: (1) a trial of rating patients by several raters; (2) cognitive interviews with each rater to analyze the thought process involved in each rating; (3) the drafting of the rating reference guide by a multidisciplinary panel; and (4) a review by ICF specialists to confirm consistency with the ICF. Subsequently, we conducted a first field test to gain insight into the use of the guide in practice. The reference guide was modified based on the raters' feedback in the field test, and an inter-rater reliability test was conducted thereafter. Interrater agreement was evaluated using weighted kappa statistics with linear weights.
RESULTS
The first version of the rating reference guide was successfully developed and tested. The weighted kappa coefficient in the field testing ranged from 0.25 to 0.92. The interrater reliability testing of the rating reference guide modified based on the field test results yielded an improved weighted kappa coefficient ranging from 0.53 to 0.78. Relative improvements in the weighted kappa coefficients were observed in seven out of the nine categories. Consequently, seven out of nine categories were found to have a weighted kappa coefficient of 0.61 or higher.
CONCLUSIONS
In this study, we developed and modified a rating reference guide for the body function categories of the ICF Generic-30 Set. The interrater reliability test using the final version of the rating reference guide showed moderate to substantial interrater agreement, which encouraged the use of the ICF in rehabilitation practice.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34126940
doi: 10.1186/s12874-021-01302-0
pii: 10.1186/s12874-021-01302-0
pmc: PMC8204586
doi:
Types de publication
Clinical Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
121Références
Ann Rheum Dis. 2007 Aug;66(8):1078-84
pubmed: 17223659
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2019 Aug;100(8):1450-1457.e1
pubmed: 30557550
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Jan 30;20(1):66
pubmed: 32000774
Disabil Rehabil. 2005 Apr 8-22;27(7-8):411-7
pubmed: 16040544
Disabil Rehabil. 2005 Apr 8-22;27(7-8):397-404
pubmed: 16040542
PLoS One. 2017 Jan 12;12(1):e0169623
pubmed: 28081205
Clin Rehabil. 1999 Jun;13(3):229-42
pubmed: 10392650
Disabil Rehabil. 2005 Apr 8-22;27(7-8):367-73
pubmed: 16040538
Spinal Cord. 2007 Jun;45(6):444-51
pubmed: 17387316
Biometrics. 1977 Mar;33(1):159-74
pubmed: 843571
J Adv Nurs. 2008 Apr;62(1):107-15
pubmed: 18352969
J Rehabil Med. 2016 Jun 13;48(6):508-14
pubmed: 27008067
Md State Med J. 1965 Feb;14:61-5
pubmed: 14258950
Disabil Rehabil. 2019 Mar;41(5):541-548
pubmed: 28988490
BMC Public Health. 2014 Mar 03;14:218
pubmed: 24588794
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2017 Apr;53(2):290-298
pubmed: 27858402
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jul 19;7:CD003585
pubmed: 28721691
Disabil Rehabil. 2005 Apr 8-22;27(7-8):361-6
pubmed: 16040537
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2016 Jun;97(6):875-84
pubmed: 26827829
Disabil Rehabil. 2005 Apr 8-22;27(7-8):375-80
pubmed: 16040539
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2017 Feb;53(1):144-149
pubmed: 28118697
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2005 Mar 17;6:17
pubmed: 15774012
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1996 Dec;77(12):1226-32
pubmed: 8976303
BMJ Open. 2018 Dec 14;8(12):e021696
pubmed: 30552245
Adv Clin Rehabil. 1987;1:6-18
pubmed: 3503663
BMJ Open. 2015 Sep 07;5(9):e008321
pubmed: 26346874
J Rehabil Med. 2011 Jul;43(8):661-72
pubmed: 21687922
J Rehabil Med. 2001 Nov;33(6):273-8
pubmed: 11766957
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2019 Apr;55(2):258-264
pubmed: 29898590
J Pain Res. 2017 Aug 23;10:2009-2019
pubmed: 28883740
Rheumatology (Oxford). 2014 Nov;53(11):2071-9
pubmed: 24925881
Physiother Res Int. 2009 Sep;14(3):147-66
pubmed: 19194959
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2015 Feb;51(1):105-17
pubmed: 24686893
Am J Psychiatry. 2016 Mar 1;173(3):221-31
pubmed: 26684921