Outcome measurement in Australian rehabilitation environments

Douglas, Heather, Swanson, Cheryl, Gee, Travis and Bellamy, Nicholas (2005) Outcome measurement in Australian rehabilitation environments. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 37 5: 325-329. doi:10.1080/16501970510035089

Attached Files (Some files may be inaccessible until you login with your UQ eSpace credentials)
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads
UQ75513_OA.pdf Full text (open access) application/pdf 124.61KB 0

Author Douglas, Heather
Swanson, Cheryl
Gee, Travis
Bellamy, Nicholas
Title Outcome measurement in Australian rehabilitation environments
Journal name Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 1650-1977
1651-2081
Publication date 2005
Year available 2005
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1080/16501970510035089
Open Access Status File (Publisher version)
Volume 37
Issue 5
Start page 325
End page 329
Total pages 5
Place of publication Uppsala, Sweden
Publisher Stiftelsen Rehabiliteringsinformation / Foundation for Rehabilitation Information
Collection year 2005
Language eng
Subject C1
320000 Medical and Health Sciences
730303 Occupational, speech and physiotherapy
Abstract Objective: To determine the frequency and pattern of methods of outcome assessment used in Australian physical rehabilitation environments. Design: Postal survey. Methods: A questionnaire on service type, staffing, numbers of adults treated and outcome measures used for 7 conditions related to injury and road trauma as well as stroke and neuromuscular disorders was sent to 973 services providing adult physical rehabilitation treatment. Results: Questionnaires were completed by 440 service providers for a response rate of 45%, similar to that reported in a recent European survey reported in this journal. A small number of measures were reported as in use by most respondents, while a large number of measures were used by a few respondents. Measures of physical changes were used more frequently than those of generic well-being or quality of life. Ease of use and reporting to other professionals were cited as the most important reasons in selection of outcome measures. Conclusion: This Australian-wide survey detected considerable heterogeneity in outcome measurement procedures used in rehabilitation environments. While the goal of measurement may vary between providers and differ between conditions, the results highlight opportunities for harmonization, benchmarking and measurement of health-related quality of life.
Keyword Australia
Rehabilitation
Outcome Measures
Change
Standardization
Benchmarking
Sport Sciences
Reliability
Framework
Validity
Scales
Sf-36
Pain
Q-Index Code C1
Institutional Status UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collections: Excellence in Research Australia (ERA) - Collection
2006 Higher Education Research Data Collection
School of Medicine Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 10 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 10 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Wed, 15 Aug 2007, 05:53:55 EST