Abo Bibliothek: Guest
Digitales Portal Digitale Bibliothek eBooks Zeitschriften Referenzen und Berichte Forschungssammlungen
Critical Reviews™ in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine
SJR: 0.121 SNIP: 0.228 CiteScore™: 0.5

ISSN Druckformat: 0896-2960
ISSN Online: 2162-6553

Critical Reviews™ in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine

DOI: 10.1615/CritRevPhysRehabilMed.2018025217
pages 77-92

Content Comparison among Commonly Used Self-Reported Fatigue Instruments in Post-Polio Syndrome

Surajo Kamilu Sulaiman
School of Rehabilitation Therapy, Louise D. Acton Building, 31 George Street, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6 Canada
Marcia Finlayson
School of Rehabilitation Therapy, Louise D. Acton Building, 31 George Street, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6 Canada
Kathleen Norman
School of Rehabilitation Therapy, Louise D. Acton Building, 31 George Street, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6 Canada
Heather Michelle Aldersey
School of Rehabilitation Therapy, Louise D. Acton Building, 31 George Street, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6 Canada
Vincent G. DePaul
School of Rehabilitation Therapy, Louise D. Acton Building, 31 George Street, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6 Canada

ABSTRAKT

Various self-reported fatigue instruments are commonly used to assess fatigue in post-polio syndrome. It is unclear whether these instruments are conceptually multidimensional based on the biopsychosocial model of disability. In this review, we identity the commonly used fatigue instruments in post-polio syndrome and analyze their contents based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). A literature search was conducted to identify commonly used fatigue instruments in post-polio syndrome. Items from the instruments were extracted, and concepts therein were identified and linked to the ICF categories based on the standardized ICF linking rules. Content density, content diversity, and measure of ICF linkage were analyzed for these instruments. Our findings revealed that the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), the Modified Fatigue Impact Scale (MFIS), and the Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI) are the most commonly used fatigue instruments in post-polio syndrome. The FSS, MFIS, and MFI have a content densities of 2.2,1.6 and 1.3, respectively; content diversities of 0.4, 0.5, and 0.5, respectively; and ICF linkages of 90% 85%, and 85%, respectively. The FSS, MFIS, and MFI are generally consistent with the ICF domains of body function, activities, and participation. The FSS assesses mainly physical and mental fatigue, whereas the MFIS and MFI mainly assess the dimension of mental fatigue. Therefore, these scales cannot be used interchangeably.


Articles with similar content:

The Efficacy of Exercise Interventions in Reducing Side Effects in Young Women with Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Critical Reviews™ in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Vol.30, 2018, issue 3
Jenna Smith-Turchyn, Kellie Moher, Caroline Anna Head, Tiffany McKinley, Alexandra Danks
A Theoretical Perspective on Exercise Adherence and Osteoporosis using the Theory of Planned Behavior and the Social Cognitive Theory
Critical Reviews™ in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Vol.28, 2016, issue 1-2
Cheryl Missiuna, Isabel Rodrigues, Joy C. MacDermid
Evaluation and Management of Musculoskeletal and Pelvic Disorders of Pregnancy
Critical Reviews™ in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Vol.18, 2006, issue 3
Kelly C. McInnis, Michelle Mottola, Sheila Dugan, Joanne Borg-Stein, Jane Gruber
Functional Outcome Following Lower Extremity Amputation: A Review of Contextual Factors Influencing Function in Low- to Middle-Income Group Countries
Critical Reviews™ in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Vol.31, 2019, issue 2
Swagatika Mishra, Bela Agarwal, Megha Sonkhia, Abhishek Gupta, Rajani Mullerpatan, Blessy Thomas
Life Satisfaction, Functional Abilities, Social Roles, Depression, Environmental Barriers, and Health in Young Adults with Cerebral Palsy: An Exploratory Study
Critical Reviews™ in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Vol.27, 2015, issue 2-4
Peter Smith, Mary E. Gannotti, Henry Chambers, Chester Tylkowski, Christin L. Daniels