共 50 条
Assessment of community integration following traumatic brain injury
被引:50
|作者:
Salter, Katherine
[1
]
Foley, Norine
[1
]
Jutai, Jeffrey
[1
,2
]
Bayley, Mark
[3
]
Teasell, Robert
[1
,2
]
机构:
[1] Parkwood Hosp, Aging Rehabil & Geriatr Care Program, Lawson Hlth Res Inst, London, ON N6C 5J1, Canada
[2] Univ Western Ontario, Schulich Sch Med, Dept Phys Med & Rehabil, London, ON, Canada
[3] Toronto Rehabil Inst, Neurorehabil Program, Toronto, ON, Canada
关键词:
Assessment;
community integration;
TBI;
D O I:
10.1080/02699050802425428
中图分类号:
Q189 [神经科学];
学科分类号:
071006 ;
摘要:
Primary objective: Despite the importance of community integration to individuals with traumatic brain injury, it is assessed relatively infrequently. The present paper provides a review of current approaches to the assessment of community integration, including evaluation of psychometric and administrative properties reported in the literature. Main outcome and results: Based on results from existing systematic reviews, the Community Integration Questionnaire (CIQ), Craig Handicap Assessment and Reporting Technique (CHART), Reintegration to Normal Living Index (RNLI), Sydney Psychosocial Reintegration Scale (SPRS) and Community Integration Measure (CIM) were included in the present study. Descriptive details are provided along with results of psychometric evaluations and discussion of the strengths and limitations associated with each instrument. Conclusions: The instruments reviewed all provide assessment of three core elements of community integration: relationships with others, independence in one's own living situation and meaningful activities. Within the context of available information, the CIQ and RNLI appear the most reliable and valid, objective and subjective assessments of community reintegration, respectively. Caution is recommended in use of these tools by proxy raters. Unfortunately, with the exception of the CIQ and RNLI, evaluation of measurement characteristics and clinical usefulness is lacking. To promote an informed process of selection of tools, further evaluation is recommended.
引用
收藏
页码:820 / 835
页数:16
相关论文