Search

Background: Several Patient Reported Outcome Measurements (PROMs) can be used to quantify participation in rehabilitation patients, yet there is limited comparative research on their content and psychometric properties to make an informed decision between them., Objective: To compare the content and several psychometric properties of the Restriction and Satisfaction subscales of the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation - Participation (USER-P) with the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities (PROMIS-APS) and Satisfaction with Social Roles and Activities (PROMIS-SPS) v2.0 8-item short forms., Methods: A cross-sectional survey among patients who received rehabilitation treatment ( N  = 563). Coverage of participation domains, distributions, inter-item correlations, internal consistency, construct validity, and discriminative validity were compared between the PROMs., Results: The USER-P subscales cover more participation domains than the PROMIS short forms. All PROMs demonstrated adequate internal consistency ( α  > 0.82) and each had >75% of the hypotheses regarding construct validity confirmed., Conclusions: The internal consistency, construct and discriminative validity were similar between the USER-P subscales and the PROMIS short forms. It appeared that the USER-P offers more broad information about participation on item level and the total scores of PROMIS short forms offer more precise general information regarding participation.

Purpose: To describe the outcomes of an interdisciplinary multimodal pain treatment (IMPT) for chronic musculoskeletal pain (CMP) patients up until 12 months post-treatment., Materials and Methods: Data were gathered during routine clinical practice during a 3-year period (2019-2021) at six Dutch rehabilitation centres. Assessments included patient-reported outcome measures for multiple domains including disability, pain and fatigue. Longitudinal data were analysed using repeated-measures models and by quantifying responder rates., Results: Included were 2309 patients with a mean age of 43.7 (SD 12.9) years, of which 73% female. All outcomes showed significant improvements at each timepoint. At discharge, large effect sizes were found for disability, average and worst pain, fatigue and health-related quality of life. Improvements were largely sustained at 12-months. Relatively large proportions of patients had clinically relevant improvements after treatment (pain-related disability: 60%; average pain: 52%; worst pain: 37.4%; work capacity: 50%; concentration: 50%; fatigue: 46%). Patients who received a treatment extension showed further improvements for all outcome measures, except average pain., Conclusions: At group level, all outcomes significantly improved with mainly large effect sizes. The results were mostly sustained. The proportion of patients showing clinically relevant improvements tends to be larger than previously reported for mixed CMP patients.

Purpose: To develop and explore underlying dimensions of the Self-Regulation Assessment (SeRA) and psychometric features of potential components. Further, to identify associations between the SeRA and disability-management self-efficacy, type of diagnosis, and type of rehabilitation., Materials and Methods: Based on a previously developed model of self-regulation, expert and patient opinions, and cognitive interviews, a list of 22 items on self-regulation (the SeRA) was constructed. The SeRA was included in a cross-sectional survey among a multi-diagnostic group of 563 former rehabilitation patients. Exploratory analyses were conducted., Results: Respondents had a mean age of 56.5 ( SD 12.7) years. The largest diagnostic groups were chronic pain disorder and brain injury. Four components were found within the SeRA, labelled as "insight into own health condition," "insight into own capabilities," "apply self-regulation," and "organization of help." Cronbach's alpha was high (total scale: 0.93, subscales: range 0.85-0.89). Only scores on the first subscale showed a ceiling effect. Subscale three showed the highest correlation with a self-efficacy measure. Small differences in SeRA total scores (range 71.6-78.1) were found between different diagnostic groups., Conclusion: The SeRA is a new self-regulation measure with four subscales. Further research is needed to establish the validity and reliability of the SeRA. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONThe Self-Regulation Assessment (SeRA) was developed to provide a comprehensive measurement of self-regulation among rehabilitation populations.The SeRA could potentially be used to identify persons with self-regulation problems at the start of rehabilitation treatment and measure outcomes of rehabilitation for self-regulation.The SeRA could potentially be used to help analyse outcomes of rehabilitation practice as well as evaluate interventions on self-regulation.