Outcome Measurement Tools for Functional Assessment of the Shoulder

2013 ◽  
pp. 585-597
Author(s):  
Warren R. Dunn ◽  
James P. Leonard
2007 ◽  
pp. 67-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dalton L. Wolfe ◽  
Jackie S. Hebert ◽  
William C. Miller ◽  
A. Barry Deathe ◽  
Michael Devlin ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 8-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn Yorkston ◽  
Carolyn Baylor

Patient-reported outcome measures contain information that comes directly from the patient without interpretation by anyone else. These measures are an important part of a clinicians' arsenal of assessment approaches and are critical in the development of patient-centered approaches to intervention. In this introduction to patient-reported outcome measurement tools, a history is provided of this approach to measurement and its place within the context of clinical research and practice. The process of instrument development and application will be reviewed, along with examples of measurement tools from the field of neurological communication disorders. This introduction is supplemented by references that provide interested readers with more detailed information.


Author(s):  
Alberto Cauli

In order to define and validate standardized outcome measurement tools both for therapeutic trials and for real life clinics, the need to precisely identify the relevant domains of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis has led to the ‘rassemblement’ of experts and patients in the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA). The output of intensive work, performed according to the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) scientific method, has been the definition of the key domains and instruments relevant in PsA evaluation. This chapter summarizes the present approach in PsA assessment, focusing on the ‘pathophysiological manifestations’, as well as current ideas regarding future revisions. Patient-related outcome measures and composite scores will be detailed in other chapters.


2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chul-Won Ha ◽  
Yong-Beom Park ◽  
Young-Suk Song ◽  
Won-Young Lee ◽  
Yong-Geun Park

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 205566831773894 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth Southall ◽  
Joshua R Tuazon ◽  
Abdul H Djokhdem ◽  
Eleanor A van den Heuvel ◽  
Walter Wittich ◽  
...  

The goal of this narrative review is to evaluate the efficacy of available questionnaires for assessing the outcomes of “continence difficulty” interventions and to assess the selected questionnaires concerning aspects of stigmatization. The literature was searched for research related to urinary incontinence, as well as questionnaires and rating scale outcome measurement tools. The following sources were searched: Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Medline, and PubMed. The following keywords were used separately or in combination: “Urinary incontinence,” “therapy,” ”treatment outcome,” “patient satisfaction,” “quality of life,” “systematic reviews,” “aged 65+ years,” and “questionnaire.” The search yielded 194 references, of which 11 questionnaires fit the inclusion criteria; 6 of the 11 questionnaires did not have any stigma content and the content regarding stigma that was identified in the other five was very limited. A representative model of how stigma impacts continence difficulty interventions was proposed. While the 11 incontinence specific measurement tools that were assessed were well researched and designed specifically to measure the outcomes of incontinence interventions, they have not been used consistently or extensively and none of the measures thoroughly assess stigma. Further studies are required to examine how the stigma associated with continence difficulty impacts upon health care interventions.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Arlene Chiong Maya ◽  
Therese Daniela Manaloto ◽  
Christian Rimando ◽  
Maria Eliza Dela Cruz ◽  
Daniel Stephen Banting ◽  
...  

With the COVID-19 pandemic, the adoption of telerehabilitation has rapidly increased to improve access and minimize cross-infection risk to patients. Nevertheless, Filipino pediatric physical therapists (PTs) must ensure that they conduct evidence-based procedures for specific tests and measures to determine patient outcomes. This investigation reported the most common pediatric outcome measurement tools (OMTs) used in telerehabilitation by Filipino pediatric PTs treating 0 to 21-year-olds in the Philippines. Validation and pilot testing of an adapted questionnaire on OMT usage was undertaken before dissemination via email and social media. Pediatric PTs reported that the commonly used OMTs in telerehabilitation are Gross Motor Function Measure (GMFM) (100%)—including both versions of GMFM-88 and GMFM-66 followed by Pediatric Balance Scale (PBS) (30%). These findings support the use of feasible OMTs in pediatric telerehabilitation due to their applicability in the online setting.


2009 ◽  
Vol 123 (8) ◽  
pp. 823-829 ◽  
Author(s):  
P N Carding ◽  
J A Wilson ◽  
K MacKenzie ◽  
I J Deary

AbstractResearchers evaluating voice disorder interventions currently have a plethora of voice outcome measurement tools from which to choose. Faced with such a wide choice, it would be beneficial to establish a clear rationale to guide selection. This article reviews the published literature on the three main areas of voice outcome assessment: (1) perceptual rating of voice quality, (2) acoustic measurement of the speech signal and (3) patient self-reporting of voice problems. We analysed the published reliability, validity, sensitivity to change and utility of the common outcome measurement tools in each area. From the data, we suggest that routine voice outcome measurement should include (1) an expert rating of voice quality (using the Grade-Roughness-Breathiness-Asthenia-Strain rating scale) and (2) a short self-reporting tool (either the Vocal Performance Questionnaire or the Vocal Handicap Index 10). These measures have high validity, the best reported reliability to date, good sensitivity to change data and excellent utility ratings. However, their application and administration require attention to detail. Acoustic measurement has arguable validity and poor reliability data at the present time. Other areas of voice outcome measurement (e.g. stroboscopy and aerodynamic phonatory measurements) require similarly detailed research and analysis.


2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aniko Deierl ◽  
Sophie Williams ◽  
Annie Aloysius ◽  
Rosie Hurlston ◽  
Jayanta Banerjee

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document