Skip to Main Content (Press Enter)

Logo UNISR
  • ×
  • Home
  • Persone
  • Pubblicazioni
  • Facoltà
  • Ambiti Di Ricerca

UNIFIND
Logo UNISR

|

UNIFIND

unisr.it
  • ×
  • Home
  • Persone
  • Pubblicazioni
  • Facoltà
  • Ambiti Di Ricerca
  1. Pubblicazioni

A comparison between WHODAS 2.0 and Modified Barthel Index: Which tool is more suitable for assessing the disability and the recovery rate in orthopedic rehabilitation?

Articolo
Data di Pubblicazione:
2018
Citazione:
A comparison between WHODAS 2.0 and Modified Barthel Index: Which tool is more suitable for assessing the disability and the recovery rate in orthopedic rehabilitation? / Galli, Tiziana; Mirata, Paolo; Foglia, Emanuela; Croce, Davide; Porazzi, Emanuele; Ferrario, Lucrezia; Ricci, Elena; Garagiola, Elisabetta; Pagani, Roberta; Banfi, Giuseppe. - In: CLINICOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH. - ISSN 1178-6981. - 10:(2018), pp. 301-307. [10.2147/CEOR.S150526]
Abstract:
Purpose: The aim of the present study was to compare 2 clinical assessment tools, the Modified Barthel Index (currently administered to patients admitted into inpatient rehabilitation units after elective hip or knee arthroplasty) with the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 scale, in order to identify which tool is more suitable for assessing the disability and the “recovery rate”. Patients and methods: A perspective multicenter observational study was developed, involving 2 hospital authorities in Italy. Eighty consecutive cases of inpatients were enrolled. Patient’s disability was evaluated using both of the aforementioned tools, before and after the rehabilitation program. Results: The WHODAS 2.0 score was, on average, 12.21% higher than the Modified Barthel Index, before the surgical intervention. Modified Barthel Index measures could be considered as a determinant and a predictor of length of stay. Conclusion: The Modified Barthel Index is limited, since it does not consider a patient’s perspective. The WHODAS 2.0 scale fully considers a patient’s perception of disability. Therefore, both assessment scales should be administered in clinical practice, in order to provide integration of clinical information with a patient’s reported outcome measures.
Tipologia CRIS:
1.1 Articolo in rivista
Elenco autori:
Galli, Tiziana; Mirata, Paolo; Foglia, Emanuela; Croce, Davide; Porazzi, Emanuele; Ferrario, Lucrezia; Ricci, Elena; Garagiola, Elisabetta; Pagani, Roberta; Banfi, Giuseppe
Autori di Ateneo:
BANFI GIUSEPPE
Link alla scheda completa:
https://iris.unisr.it/handle/20.500.11768/82588
Pubblicato in:
CLINICOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH
Journal
  • Dati Generali

Dati Generali

URL

https://www.dovepress.com/getfile.php?fileID=42451
  • Utilizzo dei cookie

Realizzato con VIVO | Designed by Cineca | 26.5.1.0