Severity Classification of Functional Impairment Based on ICF Qualifiers: A New Proposal for Assessing Individuals With Pulmonary Hypertension.

IF 1.8 Q3 REHABILITATION
Jonathan Dalavina, Ivan Peres Costa, Etiene FarahTeixeira de Carvalho, Jonathan Luiz Silva, Soraia Micaela Silva, Luciana Maria Malosá Sampaio
{"title":"Severity Classification of Functional Impairment Based on ICF Qualifiers: A New Proposal for Assessing Individuals With Pulmonary Hypertension.","authors":"Jonathan Dalavina, Ivan Peres Costa, Etiene FarahTeixeira de Carvalho, Jonathan Luiz Silva, Soraia Micaela Silva, Luciana Maria Malosá Sampaio","doi":"10.1002/pri.70090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pulmonary Hypertension (PH) is a chronic condition that leads to progressive functional limitations, making the assessment of functional capacity essential for clinical management. This study aimed to classify PH patients based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) qualifiers using the Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT) and compare this classification with the World Health Organization Functional Classification (WHO-FC).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This observational study included 33 individuals with PH. Demographic data, pulmonary function, and 6MWT results were collected. Participants were classified according to ICF qualifiers (ranging from no impairment to complete impairment) and WHO-FC. The association between classifications was tested using Fisher's exact test, considering the conceptual differences between them.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most participants presented moderate functional impairment, with an average 6MWT distance of 431.5 ± 110 m, equivalent to 68% of the predicted value. Based on ICF qualifiers, 39% of patients had mild impairment, 42% moderate, and 18% severe impairment. However, no significant association was found between ICF qualifiers and WHO-FC, reflecting the distinct conceptual frameworks of these classifications. Unlike WHO-FC, which applies fixed cutoffs, the ICF-based classification provides a more individualized assessment by incorporating the contrast between expected and actual performance in the 6MWT.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The use of ICF qualifiers enabled a more specific evaluation of functional capacity in PH patients, complementing rather than replacing WHO-FC. This approach allows for a more individualized assessment, supporting targeted rehabilitation strategies and improving clinical decision-making in PH management.</p>","PeriodicalId":47243,"journal":{"name":"Physiotherapy Research International","volume":"30 3","pages":"e70090"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physiotherapy Research International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pri.70090","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Pulmonary Hypertension (PH) is a chronic condition that leads to progressive functional limitations, making the assessment of functional capacity essential for clinical management. This study aimed to classify PH patients based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) qualifiers using the Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT) and compare this classification with the World Health Organization Functional Classification (WHO-FC).

Methods: This observational study included 33 individuals with PH. Demographic data, pulmonary function, and 6MWT results were collected. Participants were classified according to ICF qualifiers (ranging from no impairment to complete impairment) and WHO-FC. The association between classifications was tested using Fisher's exact test, considering the conceptual differences between them.

Results: Most participants presented moderate functional impairment, with an average 6MWT distance of 431.5 ± 110 m, equivalent to 68% of the predicted value. Based on ICF qualifiers, 39% of patients had mild impairment, 42% moderate, and 18% severe impairment. However, no significant association was found between ICF qualifiers and WHO-FC, reflecting the distinct conceptual frameworks of these classifications. Unlike WHO-FC, which applies fixed cutoffs, the ICF-based classification provides a more individualized assessment by incorporating the contrast between expected and actual performance in the 6MWT.

Discussion: The use of ICF qualifiers enabled a more specific evaluation of functional capacity in PH patients, complementing rather than replacing WHO-FC. This approach allows for a more individualized assessment, supporting targeted rehabilitation strategies and improving clinical decision-making in PH management.

基于ICF限定词的功能损害严重程度分类:评估肺动脉高压个体的新建议。
背景:肺动脉高压(Pulmonary Hypertension, PH)是一种慢性疾病,可导致进行性功能限制,因此功能能力评估对临床管理至关重要。本研究旨在使用6分钟步行测试(6MWT),根据国际功能、残疾和健康分类(ICF)限定符对PH患者进行分类,并将该分类与世界卫生组织功能分类(WHO-FC)进行比较。方法:本观察性研究纳入33例ph患者,收集人口学资料、肺功能和6MWT结果。参与者根据ICF限定条件(从无损伤到完全损伤)和WHO-FC进行分类。考虑到分类之间的概念差异,使用Fisher的精确检验来检验分类之间的关联。结果:大多数参与者表现为中度功能障碍,平均6MWT距离为431.5±110 m,相当于预测值的68%。根据ICF限定条件,39%的患者有轻度损害,42%有中度损害,18%有重度损害。然而,ICF修饰词与WHO-FC之间没有发现显著关联,反映了这些分类的不同概念框架。与采用固定截止值的WHO-FC不同,基于icf的分类通过纳入6MWT预期绩效与实际绩效之间的对比,提供了更加个性化的评估。讨论:使用ICF限定词能够更具体地评估PH患者的功能能力,补充而不是取代WHO-FC。这种方法允许更个性化的评估,支持有针对性的康复策略和改善PH管理的临床决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.90%
发文量
53
期刊介绍: Physiotherapy Research International is an international peer reviewed journal dedicated to the exchange of knowledge that is directly relevant to specialist areas of physiotherapy theory, practice, and research. Our aim is to promote a high level of scholarship and build on the current evidence base to inform the advancement of the physiotherapy profession. We publish original research on a wide range of topics e.g. Primary research testing new physiotherapy treatments; methodological research; measurement and outcome research and qualitative research of interest to researchers, clinicians and educators. Further, we aim to publish high quality papers that represent the range of cultures and settings where physiotherapy services are delivered. We attract a wide readership from physiotherapists and others working in diverse clinical and academic settings. We aim to promote an international debate amongst the profession about current best evidence based practice. Papers are directed primarily towards the physiotherapy profession, but can be relevant to a wide range of professional groups. The growth of interdisciplinary research is also key to our aims and scope, and we encourage relevant submissions from other professional groups. The journal actively encourages submissions which utilise a breadth of different methodologies and research designs to facilitate addressing key questions related to the physiotherapy practice. PRI seeks to encourage good quality topical debates on a range of relevant issues and promote critical reflection on decision making and implementation of physiotherapy interventions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信