We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, N.I.H., Intramural
Validation Study
Validation of the Work-Disability Physical Functional Assessment Battery.
Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2018 September
OBJECTIVE: To examine the validity of the self-report Work-Disability Functional Assessment Battery (WD-FAB) physical function scales relative to clinician ratings of function and a performance-based functional capacity evaluation called the Physical Work Performance Evaluation (PWPE).
DESIGN: Cross-sectional.
SETTING: Outpatient rehabilitation.
PARTICIPANTS: Adults (N=50) participating in physical therapy for musculoskeletal conditions.
INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients completed the PWPE and the WD-FAB physical function scales including Changing and Maintaining Body Position, Whole Body Mobility, Upper Body Function, and Upper Extremity Fine Motor. The physical therapist also answered the WD-FAB questions on the patient's physical functioning. The WD-FAB computer-adaptive test version administered up to 10 items for each scale. The PWPE produces ratings from 0 to 5 indicating overall Level of Work ability: 0 (unable to work); 1 (sedentary); 2 (light); 3 (medium); 4 (heavy); 5 (very heavy). The PWPE also produces Level of Work ability ratings in the Dynamic Strength, Position Tolerance, and Mobility subsections.
RESULTS: Participating in the study were 50 patients with 1 or more conditions (shoulder, n=21; knee, n=16; low back, n=13; ankle/foot, n=10; neck, n=8; hip, n=7). The patient-based WD-FAB scores demonstrated moderate, statistically significant correlations with the provider proxy WD-FAB report (R=.49-.65). The WD-FAB Upper Body Function scale scores demonstrated moderate strength relationships with the PWPE overall ratings. The Whole Body Mobility and Changing and Maintaining Body Position scales did not demonstrate statistically significant relationships with the PWPE overall ratings.
CONCLUSIONS: We found moderate evidence for validity for the WD-FAB Upper Body Function, Whole Body Mobility, and Changing and Maintaining Body Position scales relative to clinician report and varied evidence relative to the PWPE in this clinical sample.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional.
SETTING: Outpatient rehabilitation.
PARTICIPANTS: Adults (N=50) participating in physical therapy for musculoskeletal conditions.
INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients completed the PWPE and the WD-FAB physical function scales including Changing and Maintaining Body Position, Whole Body Mobility, Upper Body Function, and Upper Extremity Fine Motor. The physical therapist also answered the WD-FAB questions on the patient's physical functioning. The WD-FAB computer-adaptive test version administered up to 10 items for each scale. The PWPE produces ratings from 0 to 5 indicating overall Level of Work ability: 0 (unable to work); 1 (sedentary); 2 (light); 3 (medium); 4 (heavy); 5 (very heavy). The PWPE also produces Level of Work ability ratings in the Dynamic Strength, Position Tolerance, and Mobility subsections.
RESULTS: Participating in the study were 50 patients with 1 or more conditions (shoulder, n=21; knee, n=16; low back, n=13; ankle/foot, n=10; neck, n=8; hip, n=7). The patient-based WD-FAB scores demonstrated moderate, statistically significant correlations with the provider proxy WD-FAB report (R=.49-.65). The WD-FAB Upper Body Function scale scores demonstrated moderate strength relationships with the PWPE overall ratings. The Whole Body Mobility and Changing and Maintaining Body Position scales did not demonstrate statistically significant relationships with the PWPE overall ratings.
CONCLUSIONS: We found moderate evidence for validity for the WD-FAB Upper Body Function, Whole Body Mobility, and Changing and Maintaining Body Position scales relative to clinician report and varied evidence relative to the PWPE in this clinical sample.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app