Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Assessment of Functional Capacity of the Musculoskeletal System in the Context of Work, Daily Living, and Sport: A Systematic Review

  • Published:
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this systematic review was to survey methods to assess the functional capacity of the musculoskeletal system within the context of work, daily activities, and sport. The following key words and synonyms were used: functional physical assessment, healthy/disabled subjects, and instruments. After applying the inclusion criteria on 697 potential studies and a methodological quality appraisal, 34 studies were included. A level of reliability > 0.80 and of > 0.60 resp 0.75 and 0.90, dependent of type of validity, was considered high. Four questionnaires (the Oswestry Disability Index, the Pain Disability Index, the Roland–Morris Disability Questionnaire, and the Upper Extremity Functional Scale) have high levels on both validity and reliability. None of the functional tests had a high level of both reliability and validity. A combination of a questionnaire and a functional test would seem to be the best instrument to assess functional capacity of the musculoskeletal system, but need further examined.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Albright A, Franz M, Hornsby G, Kriska A, Marrero D, Ullrich I, Verity LS. American College of Sports Medicine position stand. Exercise and type 2 diabetes. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000; 32(7): 1345–1360.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. WHO. International classification of functioning, disability and health: ICF. Geneva: WHO, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Tulder van M, Koes BW, Bouter LM. A cost of illness study of back pain in the Netherlands. Pain 1995; 62: 233–240.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Borghouts JAJ, Koes BW, Vondeling H, Bouter LM. Cost-of-illness of neck pain in the Netherlands in 1996. Pain 1999; 80: 629–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hemmilä HM. Quality of life and cost of care of back pain patients in Finnish general practice. Spine 2002; 27: 647–653.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Picavet HSJ, Schouten JSAG. Musculoskeletal pain in the Netherlands: Prevalences, consequences and risk groups, the DMC3-study. Pain 2003; 102: 167–178.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Urwin M, Symmons D, Allison T, Brammah T, Busby H, Roxby M, Simmons A, Gareth G. Estimating the burden of musculoskeletal disorders in the community: The comparative prevalence of symptoms at different anatomical sites, and the relation to social deprivation. Ann Rheum Dis 1998; 57: 649–655.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Reginster JY. The prevalence and burden of arthritis. Rheumatology 2002; 41(Suppl 1): 3–6.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Picavet HSJ, Schouten JSAG. Physical load in daily life and low back problems in the general population—The MORGEN study. Prev Med 2000; 31: 506–512.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ariëns GA, Bongers PM, Douwes M, Miedema MC, Hoogendoorn WE, van de Wal G, Bouter LM, van Mechelen W. Are neck flexion, neck rotation, and sitting at work risk factors for neck pain? Occup Environ Med 2001; 58: 200–207.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Burdof A, Sorock G. Positive and negative evidence of risk factors for back disorders. Scand J Work Environ Health 1997; 23: 243–256.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hoogendoorn WE, Bongers PM, de Vet HC, Douwes M, Koes BW, Miedema MC, Ariens GA, Bouter LM. Flexion and rotation of the trunk and lifting at work are risk factors for low back pain: Results of a prospective cohort study. Spine 2000; 25(23): 3087–3092.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hoozemans MJM, van der Beek AJ, Frings-Dresen MHW, van der Woude LHV, van Dijk FJH. Pushing and pulling in association with low back and shoulder complaints. Occup Environ Med 2002; 59: 696–702.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Feuerstein M. A multidisciplinary approach to the prevention, evaluation, and management of work disability. J Occup Rehabil 1990; 1(1): 5–12.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lundgren-Lindquist B, Sperling L. Functional studies in 79-year-olds. II. Upper extremity function. Scand J Rehabil Med 1983, 15(3): 117–123.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Wildner M, Wildner M, Sangha O, Clark DE, Doring A, Manstetten A. Independent living after fractures in the elderly. Osteoporos Int 2002; 13(7): 579–585.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Van Schaardenburg D, Van den Brande KJ, Ligthart GJ, Breedveld FC, Hazes JM. Musculoskeletal disorders and disability in persons aged 85 and over: A community survey. Ann Rheum Dis 1994; 53(12): 807–811.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hootman JM, Macera CA, Ainsworth BE, Addy CL, Martin M. Epidemiology of musculoskeletal injuries among sedentary and physically active adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2002; 34(5): 838–844.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Marshall SW, Mueller FO, Kirby DP, Yang J. Evaluation of safety balls and faceguards for prevention of injuries in youth baseball. JAMA 2003; 289: 194–195.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Abernethy L, MacAuley D. Impact of school sports injury. Br J Sports Med 2003; 37: 354–355.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Gabbett TJ. Incidence of injury in semi-professional rugby league players. Br J Sports Med 2003; 37: 36–43.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Federiuk CS, Schlueter JL, Adams AL. Skiing, snowboarding, and sledding injuries in a northwestern state. Wilderness Environ Med 2002; 13: 245–249.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Boyce SH, Quigley MA. An audit of sports injuries in children attending an Accident & Emergency department. Scott Med J 2003; 48: 88–90.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Fairbank JCT, Couper J, Davies JB, O’Brien JP. The Oswestry low back pain questionnaire. Physiotherapy 1980; 66: 271–273.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Roland M, Morris R. A study of natural history of low back pain. Part 1: Development of a reliable and sensitive measure of disability in low-back pain. Spine 1983; 8: 141–144.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kopec JA, Esdaile JM, Abrahamowicz M, Abenhaim L, Wood-Dauphinee S, Lamping DL, Williams JL. The Quebec back pain disability scale. Spine 1995; 20: 341–352.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Tramposh AK. The functional capacity evaluation: Measuring maximal work abilities. Occup Med 1992; 7(1): 113–124.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Jebsen RH, Taylor N, Trieschmann RB, Trotter MJ, Howard LA. An objective and standardized test of hand function. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1969; 50(6): 314–319.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Horneij E, Holmström E, Hemborg B, Isberg P-E, Ekdahl C. Inter-rater reliability and between days repeatability of eight physical performance tests. Adv Phys 2002; 4: 146–160.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Millard RW. A critical review of questionnaires for assessing pain-related disability. J Occup Rehabil 1991; 1(4): 289–302.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Altman DG. The medical literature. In: Practical statistics for medical research. London, New York, Tokyo, Melbourne, Madras: Chapman and Hall, 1991, pp. 477–499.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Hoogendoorn WE, van Poppel MNM, Bongers PM, Koes BW, Bouter LM. Physical load during work and leisure time as risk factors for back pain: A systematic review. Scand J Work Environ Health 1999; 25: 387–403.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Hulshof CTJ, Verbeek JHAM, van Dijk FJH, van der Weide WE, Braam ITJ. Evaluation research in occupational health services: General principles and a systematic review of empirical studies. Occup Environ Med 1999; 56: 361–377.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Chapter 8: Reliability. In: Health Measurement Scales: A practical guide to their development and use. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003, Vol. 3, p. 126.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Carmines EG, Zeller RA. Reliability and validity assessment. Newbury Park, London, New Dehli: Sage, 1979, pp. 11–16.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Innes E, Straker L. Reliability of work-related assessments. Work 1999; 13: 107–124.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Carmines EG, Zeller RA. Reliability and validity assessment. Newbury Park, London, New Dehli: Sage, 1979, pp. 37–51.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Carmines EG, Zeller RA. Reliability and validity assessment. Newbury Park, London, New Dehli: Sage, 1979, pp. 17–27.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Bouter LM, Van Dongen MCIM. Epidemiologisch onderzoek; opzet en interpretatie. Houten/Diegem: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum, 2000, Vol. 4, p. 279.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Chapter 7: From items to scales. In: Health Measurement Scales. A practical guide to their development. Oxford, 2003, Vol. 3, pp. 119–122.

  41. Airaksinen O, Herno A, Saari T. Surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis: Patients’ postoperative disability and working capacity. Eur Spine J 1994; 3(5): 261–264.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Burd TA, Pawelek L, Lenke LG. Upper extremity functional assessment after anterior spinal fusion via thoracotomy for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: Prospective study of twenty-five patients. Spine 2002; 27(1): 65–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Hodges SD, Humphreys SC, Eck JC, Covington LA, Harrom H. Predicting factors of successful recovery from lumbar spine surgery among workers’ compensation patients. J Am Osteopath Assoc 2001; 101(2): 78–83.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Lyle RC. A performance test for assessment of upper limb function in physical rehabilitation treatment and research. Int J Rehabil Res 1981; 4(4): 483–492.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Milhous RL, Haugh LD, Frymoyer JW, Ruess JM, Gallagher RM, Wilder DG, Callas PW. Determinants of vocational disability in patients with low back pain. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1989; 70(8): 589–593.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Pennathur A, Mital A, Contreras LR. Performance reduction in finger amputees when reaching and operating common control devices: A pilot experimental investigation using a simulated finger disability. J Occup Rehabil 2001; 11(4): 281–290.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Weiss AC, Wiedeman G Jr, Quenzer D, Hanington KR, Hastings H, Strickland JW. Upper extremity function after wrist arthrodesis. J Hand Surg [Am] 1995; 20(5): 813–817.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Wolf LD, Matheson LN, Ford DD, Kwak AL. Relationships among grip strength, work capacity, and recovery. J Occup Rehabil 1996; 6(1): 57–70.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Mayer TG, Gatchel RJ, Kishino N, Keeley J, Capra P, Mayer H, Barnett J, Mooney V. Objective assessment of spine function following industrial injury. A prospective study with comparison group and one-year follow-up. Spine 1985; 10(6): 482–493.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Rayan GM, Brentlinger A, Purnell D, Garcia-Moral CA. Functional assessment of bilateral wrist arthrodeses. J Hand Surg [Am] 1987; 12(6): 1020–1024.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Saunders RL, Beissner KL, McManis BG. Estimates of weight that subjects can lift frequently in functional capacity evaluations. Phys Ther 1997; 77(12): 1717–1728.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Irrgang JJ, Snyder-Mackler L, Wainner RS, Fu FH, Harner CD. Development of a patient-reported measure of function of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg 1998; 80: 1132–1145.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Gronblad M, Jarvinen E, Hurri H, Hupli M, Karaharju EO. Relationship of the Pain Disability Index (PDI) and the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODQ) with three dynamic physical tests in a group of patients with chronic low-back and leg pain. Clin J Pain 1994; 10(3): 197–203.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Salen BA, Spangfort EV, Nygren AL, Nordemar R. The Disability Rating Index: An instrument for the assessment of disability in clinical settings. J Clin Epidiomol 1994; 47(12): 1423–1435.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Granger CV, Ottenbacher KJ, Baker JG, Sehgal A. Reliability of a brief outpatient functional outcome assessment measure. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1995; 74(6): 469–475.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). Med Care 1992; 30(6): 473–481.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Million R, Hall W, Nilsen KH, Baker RD, Jayson MIV. Assessment of the progress of the back pain patient. Spine 1982; 7: 204–212.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Tait RC, Chibnall JT, Krause S. The pain disability index: Psychometric properties. Pain 1990; 40: 171–182.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Torgen M, Alfredsson L, Köster M, Wiktorin C, Smith KF, Kilbom A. Reproducibility of a questionnaire for assessment of present and past physical activities. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 1997; 70: 107–118.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Gibson L, Strong J. The reliability and validity of a measure of perceived functional capacity for work in chronic back pain. J Occup Rehabil 1996; 6(3): 159–175.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Vernon H, Mior S. The neck disability index: A study of reliability and validity. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1991; 14(7): 409–415.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Carroll D. A quantitative test of upper extremity function. J Chron Dis 1965; 18: 479–491.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Pransky G, Feuerstein M, Himmelstein J, Katz JN, Vickers LM. Measuring functional outcomes in work-related upper extremity disorders—Development and validation of the upper extremity function scale. J Occup Environ Med 1997; 39: 1195–1202.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Finch E, Kennedy D. The lower extremity activity profile: A health status instrument for measuring lower extremity disability. Physiother Can 1995; 47(4): 239–246.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Bhambhani Y, Esmail S, Brintnell S. The Baltimore Equipment Work Simulator: Biomechanical and physiological norms for three attachments in healthy men. Am J Occup Med 1993; 48(1): 19–25.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Fishbain DA, Abdel ME, Cutler R, Khalil TM, Sadek S, Rosomoff RS, Rosomoff HL. Measuring residual functional capacity in chronic low back pain patients based on the dictionary of occupational titles. Spine 1994; 19: 872–880.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Harwood KJ. The process of returning to work following an episode of disabling low back pain: A phenomenological study, PhD paper, New York University, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Parks KA, Crichton KS, Goldford RJ, McGill SM. A comparison of lumbar range of motion and functional ability scores in patients with low back pain: Assessment for range of motion validity. Spine 2003; 28(4): 380–384.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Hart DL. Relation between three measures of function in patients with chronic work-related pain syndromes. J Rehabil Outcome Meas 1998; 2(1): 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Strand LI, Ljunggren AE. The pick-up test for assessing performance of a daily activity in patients with back pain. Adv Physiother 2001; 3(1): 17–27.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Gans BM, Haley SM, Hallenborg SC, Mann N, Inacio CA, Faas RM. Description and interobserver reliability of the Tufts Assessment of Motor Performance. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1988; 67(5): 202–210.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Matheson LN, Mooney V, Grant JE, Affleck M, Hall H, Melles T, Lichter RL, McIntosh G. A test to measure lift capacity of physically impaired adults. Part 1: Development and reliability testing. Spine 1995; 20(19): 2119–2129.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Leferink VJM, Keizer HJE, Oosterhuis JK, Van Der Sluis CK, Ten Duis HJ. Functional outcome in patients with thoracolumbar burst fractures treated with dorsal instrumentation and transpedicular cancellous bone grafting. Eur Spine J 2003; 12(3): 261–267.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Jackson AS, Borg G, Zhang JJ, Laughery KR, Chen J. Role of physical work capacity and load weight on psychophysical lift ratings. Int J Ind Ergon 1997; 20(3): 181–190.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Mayer T, Gatchel R, Keeley J, Mayer H, Richling D. A male incumbent worker industrial database. Part III: Lumbar/cervical functional testing. Spine 1994; 19(7): 765–770.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Barber SD, Noyes FR, Mangine RE. Quantitative assessment of functional limitations in normal and anterior cruciate ligament-deficient knees. Clin Orthop Rel Res 1991; 25: 204–241.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Bolgla LA, Keskula DR. Reliability of lower extremity functional performance tests. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1997; 26(3): 138–142.

    Google Scholar 

  78. Munn J, Beard DJ, Refshauge KM, Lee RWY. Do functional-performance tests detect impairment in subjects with ankle instability? J Sport Rehabil 2002; 11(1): 40–50.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Wilson RW, Gieck JH, Gansneder BM, Perrin DH, Saliba EN, McCue FC. Reliability and responsiveness of disablement measures following acute ankle sprains among athletes. J Orthop Sport Phys 1998; 27(5): 348–355.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Strand LI, Moe-Nilssen R, Ljunggren AE. Back Performance Scale for the assessment of mobility-related activities in people with back pain. Phys Ther 2002; 82(12): 1213–1223.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Stratford PW, Binkley JM, Riddle DL, Guyatt GH. Sensitivity to change of the Roland–Morris back pain questionnaire: Part 1. Phys Ther 1998; 78(11): 1186–1196.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Roland M, Fairbank J. The Roland–Morris disability questionnaire and the Oswestry disability questionnaire. Spine 2000; 25(24): 3115–3124.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Beurskens AJ, de Vet HC, Köke AJ, van der Heijden AG, Knipschild PG. Measuring the functional status of patients with low back pain. Spine 1995; 20(9): 1017–1028.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Riddle DL, Stratford PW, Binkley JM. Sensitivity to change of the Roland–Morris pain questionnaire: Part 2. Phys Ther 1998; 78(11): 1197–1207.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Stucki G, Kroeling P. Physical therapy and rehabilitation in the management of rheumatic disorders. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2000; 14(4): 751–771.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Wyman DO. Evaluating patients for return to work. Am Fam Phys 1999; 59(4): 844–848.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Strong S. Developing expert practice. Functional capacity evaluation: The good, the bad and the ugly. Occup Ther Now 2002; 4: 5–9.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Lechner DE, Jackson JR, Roth DL, Straaton KV. Reliability and validity of a newly developed test of physical work performance. J Occup Med 1994; 36: 997–1004.

    Google Scholar 

  89. Wijnen JAG, Boersma MThLW. Claimbeoordeling en het bepalen van de functionele capaciteit. Tijdschr Bedrijfs Verzekeringsgeneeskd 2001; 9(3): 70–71.

    Google Scholar 

  90. Lechner DE, Bradbury SF, Bradley LA. Detecting sincerity of effort: A summary of methods and approaches. Phys Ther 1998; 78: 867–888.

    Google Scholar 

  91. Simonsen JC. Validation of sincerity of effort. J Back Musculoskelet 1996; 6: 289–295.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Papciak AS, Feuerstein M. Psychological factors affecting isokinetic trunc strength testing in patients with work-related chronic low back pain. J Occup Rehabil 1991; 1(2): 95–104.

    Google Scholar 

  93. Gatchel RJ. Psychosocial factors that can influence the self-assessment of function. J Occup Rehabil 2004; 14(3): 197–206.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Lackner JM, Carosella AM, Feuerstein M. Pain expectancies, pain, and functional self-efficacy expectancies as determinants of disability in patients with chronic low back disorders. J Consul Clin Psychol 1996; 64(1): 212–220.

    Google Scholar 

  95. Feuerstein M. Functional assessment for persons with musculoskeletal pain and impairment. J Occup Rehabil 2004; 14(3): 163–164.

    Google Scholar 

  96. Deyo RA, Battie M, Beurskens AJHM, Bombardier C, Croft P, Koes B, Malmivaara A, Roland M, Von Korff M, Waddell G. Outcome measures for low back pain research. Spine 1998; 23(18): 2003–2013.

    Google Scholar 

  97. Numally JC. Psychometric theory, 3rd edn. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Altman DG. Some common problems in medical research. In: Practical statistics for medical research. London, New York, Tokyo, Melbourne, Madras: Chapman and Hall, 1991, p. 404.

    Google Scholar 

  99. Innes E, Straker L. Validity of work-related assessments. Work 1999; 13: 125–152.

    Google Scholar 

  100. Van den Hout WB. The area under an ROC curve with limited information. Med Decis Making 2003; 23: 160–166.

    Google Scholar 

  101. Obuchowski NA. Receiver operating characteristic curves and their use in radiology. Radiology 2003; 229: 3–8.

    Google Scholar 

  102. Deyo RA, Centor RM. Assessing the responsiveness of functional scale to clinical change: An analogy to diagnostic test performance. J Chron Dis 1986; 39(11): 897–906.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Portney LG, Watkins MP. Foundations of clinical research: Applications to practice. Norwalk, CT: Appleton & Lange, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  104. Mc Horney C,Ware JE, Raczek AE. The MOS 36-item short-form survey (SF-36: II Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care 1993; 31: 247–263.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Anagnostis C, Mayer TG, Gatchel RJ, Proctor TJ. The Million Visual Analog Scale: Its utility for predicting tertiary rehabilitation outcomes. Spine 2003; 28: 1051–1060.

    Google Scholar 

  106. Di Fabio RP, Mackey G, Holte JB. Physical therapy outcomes for patients receiving worker’s compensation following treatment for herniated lumbar disc and mechanical low back pain syndrome. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1996; 23: 180–187.

    Google Scholar 

  107. Loisel P, Poitras S, Lemaire J, Durand P, Southiere A, Abenhaim L. Is work status of low back pain patients best described by an automatic device or by a questionnaire? Spine 1998; 23: 588–594.

    Google Scholar 

  108. Poitras S, Loisel P, Prince F, Lemaire J. Disability measurement in persons with back pain: A validity study of spinal range of motion and velocity. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2000; 81(10): 1394–1400.

    Google Scholar 

  109. Torgen M, Punnett L, Alfredsson L, Kilbom A. Physical capacity in relation to present and past physical load at work: A study of 484 men and women aged 41 to 58 years. Am J Ind Med 1999; 36: 388–400.

    Google Scholar 

  110. Fishbain DA, Cutler RB, Rosomoff H, Khalil T, Abdel-Moty E, Steele-Rosomoff R. Validity of the dictionary of occupational titles residual functional capacity battery. Clin J Pain 1999; 15: 102–110.

    Google Scholar 

  111. Matheson LN, Mooney V, Holmes D, Leggett S, Grant JE, Negri S. A test to measure lift capacity of physically impaired adults. Part 2: Reactivity in a patient sample. Spine 1995; 20: 2130–2134.

    Google Scholar 

  112. Chan WYY, Chapparo C. Effect of wrist immobilisation on upper limb function of elderly males. Technol Disabil 1999; 11: 39–49.

    Google Scholar 

  113. Jensen MP, Strom SE, Turner JA, Romano JM. Validity of the sickness impact profile roland scale as a measurement of dysfunction in chronic pain patients. Pain 1992; 50: 157–162.

    Google Scholar 

  114. Ackelman BH, Lindgren U. Validity and reliability of a modified version of the neck disability index. J Rehabil Med 2002; 34: 284–287.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Coronel Institute for Occupational and Environmental Health, Academic Medical Centre, AmCOGG: Amsterdam Centre for Research into Health and Health Care, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands

    Haije Wind, Vincent Gouttebarge, P. Paul F. M. Kuijer & Monique H. W. Frings-Dresen

  2. Coronel Institute for Occupational and Environmental Health, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, 22700, 1100 DE, Netherlands

    Haije Wind

Authors
  1. Haije Wind
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vincent Gouttebarge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. P. Paul F. M. Kuijer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Monique H. W. Frings-Dresen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Haije Wind.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wind, H., Gouttebarge, V., Kuijer, P.P.F.M. et al. Assessment of Functional Capacity of the Musculoskeletal System in the Context of Work, Daily Living, and Sport: A Systematic Review. J Occup Rehabil 15, 253–272 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-005-1223-y

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-005-1223-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation