Concordance among the patient-, proxy-, and clinician-rated versions of World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule-2.0 36-item version in India

IF 0.2 Q4 PSYCHIATRY
F. Paul, Shikha Tyagi, Subhash Das, Arif Ali
{"title":"Concordance among the patient-, proxy-, and clinician-rated versions of World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule-2.0 36-item version in India","authors":"F. Paul, Shikha Tyagi, Subhash Das, Arif Ali","doi":"10.4103/aip.aip_84_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule-2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) is a disability assessment instrument which is based on the conceptual framework of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health. It provides a global measure of disability and it has seven domains-specific scores. Objective: The present study aims to check the concordance among the patient, proxy, and clinician-rated versions of WHODAS 2.0 in India. Materials and Methods: This study was cross-sectional and comparative in nature. Sixty samples of patients with severe mental illness (SMI) were selected using a consecutive sampling procedure as per the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) criteria. Using patient, proxy, and clinician administrative version of WHODAS 2.0, the study was conducted at the outpatient department of Mental Health Institute and Department of Psychiatry, Government Medical College and Hospital Sector 32, Chandigarh, India. Patients diagnosed with SMI as per the ICD-10 aged above 18 years of age with a total duration of illness of at least more than 2 years were included. Those who refused to participate were excluded. The data were analyzed using the SPSS software. The normality of quantitative data was checked by the measures of Kolmogorov–Smirnov tests of normality. The continuous data were reported as mean ± standard deviation. The categorical variables were reported as counts and percentages. The group comparisons were made with the help of ANOVA test. Results: This study included 60 patients with SMI, and the results show that there was no significant difference found among the patient, proxy, and clinician's assessment for most items, but the mean score of the clinician-rated version score (68.733) was higher in comparison to patient- and proxy-rated versions of WHODAS 2.0. Conclusion: The overall inter-reliability of WHODAS 2.0 among the patients, proxy, and clinician was moderate. There was no significant difference among the patient, proxy, and clinician's assessments for most items. This highlights the fact that one does not have to rely on professionals' ratings for assessing the disability among patients with SMI.","PeriodicalId":52916,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Indian Psychiatry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Indian Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/aip.aip_84_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule-2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) is a disability assessment instrument which is based on the conceptual framework of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health. It provides a global measure of disability and it has seven domains-specific scores. Objective: The present study aims to check the concordance among the patient, proxy, and clinician-rated versions of WHODAS 2.0 in India. Materials and Methods: This study was cross-sectional and comparative in nature. Sixty samples of patients with severe mental illness (SMI) were selected using a consecutive sampling procedure as per the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) criteria. Using patient, proxy, and clinician administrative version of WHODAS 2.0, the study was conducted at the outpatient department of Mental Health Institute and Department of Psychiatry, Government Medical College and Hospital Sector 32, Chandigarh, India. Patients diagnosed with SMI as per the ICD-10 aged above 18 years of age with a total duration of illness of at least more than 2 years were included. Those who refused to participate were excluded. The data were analyzed using the SPSS software. The normality of quantitative data was checked by the measures of Kolmogorov–Smirnov tests of normality. The continuous data were reported as mean ± standard deviation. The categorical variables were reported as counts and percentages. The group comparisons were made with the help of ANOVA test. Results: This study included 60 patients with SMI, and the results show that there was no significant difference found among the patient, proxy, and clinician's assessment for most items, but the mean score of the clinician-rated version score (68.733) was higher in comparison to patient- and proxy-rated versions of WHODAS 2.0. Conclusion: The overall inter-reliability of WHODAS 2.0 among the patients, proxy, and clinician was moderate. There was no significant difference among the patient, proxy, and clinician's assessments for most items. This highlights the fact that one does not have to rely on professionals' ratings for assessing the disability among patients with SMI.
世界卫生组织残疾评估表-2.0的患者、代理和临床评定版本之间的一致性,印度的36项版本
背景:世界卫生组织残疾评估表-2.0 (WHODAS 2.0)是一项基于国际功能、残疾和健康分类概念框架的残疾评估工具。它提供了残疾的全球衡量标准,并有七个特定领域的分数。目的:本研究旨在检查印度患者、代理和临床评定的WHODAS 2.0版本的一致性。材料与方法:本研究为横断面比较研究。根据《国际疾病分类》(ICD-10)的标准,采用连续抽样程序选择了60例严重精神疾病患者样本。本研究在印度昌迪加尔政府医学院和医院第32区精神卫生研究所门诊部和精神病学系进行,采用患者、代理和临床医生管理版WHODAS 2.0。根据ICD-10诊断为重度精神分裂症的患者年龄在18岁以上,总病程至少超过2年。那些拒绝参加的人被排除在外。采用SPSS软件对数据进行分析。定量数据的正态性通过柯尔莫哥洛夫-斯米尔诺夫正态性检验来检验。连续数据以均数±标准差报告。分类变量以计数和百分比报告。组间比较采用方差分析检验。结果:本研究纳入60例重度精神障碍患者,结果显示患者、代理人和临床医生对大多数项目的评估无显著差异,但临床医生评分版本评分的平均得分(68.733)高于患者和代理人评分版本的WHODAS 2.0。结论:WHODAS 2.0在患者、代理和临床医生之间的总体互信度为中等。患者、代理人和临床医生对大多数项目的评估没有显著差异。这突出了一个事实,即人们不必依靠专业人士的评级来评估重度精神障碍患者的残疾。
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
自引率
25.00%
发文量
38
审稿时长
23 weeks
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信