Top

Gepubliceerd in:

2012 | OriginalPaper | Hoofdstuk

5 Hanteerbaarheid van een meetinstrument

Auteurs : Meta Wildenbeest, Harriët Wittink

Uitgeverij: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Samenvatting

Naast de methodologische kwaliteit (zie hoofdstukken 6 en 7) is voor de dagelijkse praktijk de hanteerbaarheid (ook wel gebruiksvriendelijkheid genoemd) van een meetinstrument van belang. Stap 5 van het stappenplan gaat hierover (zie figuur 5.1).

vorige hoofdstuk 4 Zoeken naar een meetinstrument

volgende hoofdstuk 6 Methodologische eigenschappen van meetinstrumenten

Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust. Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res 2002;11:193–205.CrossRef

Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health Measurement Scales. A practical guide to their development and use. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2001.

Romsing J, Hertel S, Moller-Sonnergaard J, Rasmussen M. Postoperative pain in Danish children: self-report measures of pain intensity. J Pediatr Nurs 1996;11:119–24.PubMedCrossRef

Van Cleve LJ Savedra MC. Pain location: validity and reliability of body outline markings by 4 to 7-year-old children who are hospitalized. Pediatr Nurs 1993;19:217–20.PubMed

Wong DL, Baker CM. Pain in children: comparison of assessment scales. Pediatr Nurs 1988;14:9–17.PubMed

Duff L, Louw G, McClarey M. Clinical guideline for the recognition and assessment of acute pain in children. Paediatr Nurs 1999;11:18–21.PubMed

McGrath PA, Seifert CE, Speechley KN, Booth JC, Stitt L, Gibson MC. A new analogue scale for assessing children’s pain: an initial validation study. Pain 1996;64:435–43.PubMedCrossRef

Carr, DB, Jacox AK, Chapman CG. Acute Pain Management: Operative or Medical procedures and Trauma. Clinical Practice Guideline No.1. Rockville (MD): Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, Public Health Service (US), Department of Health and Human Services. 1992. AHCPR Pub. No. 92–0032

Herr KA, Spratt K, Mobily PR, Richardson G. Pain intensity assessment in older adults: use of experimental pain to compare psychometric properties and usability of selected pain scales with younger adults. Clin J Pain 2004;20:207–19.PubMedCrossRef

10.

Herr KA, Mobily PR, Kohout FJ, Wagenaar D. Evaluation of the Faces Pain Scale for use with the elderly. Clin J Pain 1998;14:29–38.PubMedCrossRef

11.

American Geriatrics Society Panel on Persistent Pain in Older Persons. Clinical practice guidelines: The management of persistent pain in older persons. J. Am Geriatr Soc 2002;50(6 Suppl):S205–24.

12.

Auger C, Demers L, Swaine B. Making sense of pragmatic criteria for the selection of geriatric rehabilitation measurement tools. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 2006;43:65–83.PubMedCrossRef

13.

Turner RR, Quittner AL, Parasuraman BM, Kallich JD, Cleeland CS. Patient-reported outcomes: instrument development and selection issues. Value.Health 2007;10 Suppl 2:S86–93.

14.

Grunau RE, Oberlander T, Holsti L, Whitfield MF. Bedside application of the Neonatal Facial Coding System in pain assessment of premature neonates. Pain 1998;76:277–86.PubMedCrossRef

15.

Fuchs-Lacelle S, Hadjistavropoulos T. Development and preliminary validation of the pain assessment checklist for seniors with limited ability to communicate (PACSLAC). Pain Manag Nurs 2004;5:37–49.PubMedCrossRef

16.

Wary B, Collectif Doloplus. Doloplus-2, une échelle pour évaluer la douleur. Soins Gerontol 1999;19:25–7.[Frans]PubMed

17.

Zwakhalen SM, Hamers JP, Abu-Saad HH, Berger MP. Pain in elderly people with severe dementia: a systematic review of behavioural pain assessment tools. BMC Geriatr 2006;6:3.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

18.

Heller A, Wade DT, Wood VA, Sunderland A, Hewer RL, Ward E. Arm function after stroke: measurement and recovery over the first three months. J Neurol.Neurosurg Psychiatry 1987;50:714–9.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

19.

American College of Sports Medicine. Guidelines for exercise testing and prescription. 6th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & amp; Wilkins, 2000.

20.

Shephard RJ. PAR-Q, Canadian Home Fitness Test and exercise screening alternatives. Sports Med 1988;5:185–95.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Thomas S, Reading J, Shephard RJ. Revision of the Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q). Can J Sport Sci. 1992;17:338–45.PubMed

22.

Borg GA. Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1982;14:377–81.PubMed

23.

Morree JJ de, Jongert MWA, Poel G van der. Inspanningsfysiologie oefentherapie en training. Houten: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum; 2006.

24.

Vogels EMHM, Bertram RJJ, Graus JJJ, Hendriks HJM, Hulst R van, Hulzebos RJ et al. KNGF-richtlijn Hartrevalidatie. Nederlands Tijdschr Fysioth 2001;111(3:Supplement):1–54.

25.

Bellamy N, Muirden KD, Brooks PM, Barraclough D, Tellus MM, Campbell J. A survey of outcome measurement procedures in routine rheumatology outpatient practice in Australia. J Rheumatol 1999;26:1593–9.PubMed

26.

Terluin B. De vierdimensionale klachtenlijst (4DKL); een vragenlijst voor het meten van distress, depressie, angst en somatisatie. Huisarts Wet 1996;39:538–47.

27.

Terluin B. Wat meet de Vierdimensionale Klachtenlijst (4DKL) in vergelijking met enkele bekende klachtenlijsten? Tijdschr Gezondheidswet 1998;76:435–41.

28.

Guyatt GH, Pugsley SO, Sullivan MJ, Thompson PJ, Berman L, Jones NL et al. Effect of encouragement on walking test performance. Thorax 1984;39:818–22.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

29.

Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne C. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992;30:473–83.PubMedCrossRef

30.

Piper MC, Pinnell LE, Darrah J, Maguire T, Byrne PJ. Construction and validation of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS). Can.J Public Health 1992;83 Suppl 2:S46–50.

31.

Lyle RC. A performance test for assessment of upper limb function in physical rehabilitation treatment and research. Int J Rehabil Res 1981;4:483–92.PubMedCrossRef

32.

Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 2000;25:3186–91.PubMedCrossRef

33.

Berg K, Wood-Dauphinee S, Williams JL, Gayton D. Measuring balance in the elderly: Preliminary development of an instrument. Physiotherapy Canada 1989;41:304–11.CrossRef

34.

Tarlov AR, Ware JE Jr, Greenfield S, Nelson EC, Perrin E, Zubkoff M. The Medical Outcomes Study. An application of methods for monitoring the results of medical care. JAMA 1989;262:925–30PubMedCrossRef

35.

Lundberg MK, Styf J, Carlsson SG. A psychometric evaluation of the Swedish version of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK) from a physiotherapeutic perspective. Physiother Theory Pract 2004;20:121–30.CrossRef

36.

Wade DT, Wood VA, Heller A, Maggs J, Langton HR. Walking after stroke. Measurement and recovery over the first 3 months. Scand J Rehabil Med 1987;19:25–30.PubMed

37.

Duncan PW, Weiner DK, Chandler J, Studenski S. Functional reach: a new clinical measure of balance. J Gerontol 1990;45:M192–7.PubMedCrossRef

38.

Smits-Engelsman BCM, Bekkering GE, Hendriks HJM. KNGF-richtlijn Osteoporose. Tijdschr voor Fysiother 2001;111(3:Supplement):1–36.

39.

Wasserman K. Principles of Exercise Testing and Interpretation. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & amp; Wilkins; 1999.

40.

ATS Committee on Proficiency Standards for Clinical Pulmonary Function Laboratories. ATS statement: guidelines for the six-minute walk test. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002;166:111–7.CrossRef

41.

Sciurba F, Criner GJ, Lee SM, Mohsenifar Z, Shade D, Slivka W et al. Six-minute walk distance in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: reproducibility and effect of walking course layout and length. Am J Respir.Crit Care Med 2003;167:1522–7.CrossRef

42.

Brooks D, Solway S, Gibbons WJ. ATS statement on six-minute walk test. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2003;167:1287.PubMedCrossRef

43.

Casanova C, Cote CG, Marin JM, de Torrs JP, Aguirre-Jaime A, Mendez R et al. The 6-min walking distance: long-term follow up in patients with COPD. Eur.Respir J 2007;29:535–40.PubMedCrossRef

44.

Riddle DL, Stratford PW. Interpreting validity indexes for diagnostic tests: an illustration using the Berg balance test. Phys Ther 1999;79:939–48.PubMed

Titel: 5 Hanteerbaarheid van een meetinstrument
Auteurs: Meta Wildenbeest
Harriët Wittink
Uitgeverij: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum
Boek: Meten in de praktijk
Print ISBN: 978-90-313-9222-3

Elektronisch ISBN: 978-90-313-9223-0

Copyright: 2012
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-313-9223-0_5

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Samenvatting

Log in om toegang te krijgen