Terveyteen liittyvä elämänlaatu laitoskuntoutuksen vaikuttavuuden arvioinnissa : RAND-36-mittarin soveltuvuus työikäisten laitoskuntoutuksen ongelmaprofiilin määrittämiseen ja kuntoutuksen vaikutusten arvioimiseen

The aim of the present research was to examine the validity of the RAND-36 measure of health-related quality of life among the working age rehabilitation clients. The research included two cross-sectional studies and one follow-up study. The subjects of the first study (n = 794) participated in the first period of the five following types of rehabilitation: occupationally oriented medical rehabilitation, musculoskeletal rehabilitation, medical rehabilitation for job burnout, rehabilitation for supporting the work ability and capacity of disabled subjects (vocational rehabilitation) and individualized rehabilitation between October 2000 and October 2001. The subjects of the second study (n = 990) participated in the same rehabilitation during their first rehabilitation period between May 2007 and May 2008. The first subjects participated in a follow-up period no later than May 2003 with the exception of the individual rehabilitation clients (n = 588). Based on the ICF classification, the RAND-36 provides a diverse measure of the health-related quality of life and of the capacity for subjective, perceived physical and psycho-social functioning. The construct properties of the RAND-36 measure proved to be very consistent on the basis of both the cluster and confirmatory factor analyses. At the group level, the RAND-36 measure was shown to be illustrative and sensitive in differentiating the clients’ rehabilitation needs. The results of cluster analyses with the two cross-sectional data indicated a consistent five-cluster solution of rehabilitation groups on the basis of the eight subscales of health-related quality of life. Each of these clusters represented a clear difference in their need for rehabilitation. The RAND-36 measure proved to be sensitive to change. The changes observed in the pre- and post-conditions in relation to all the subscales of quality of life were statistically significant. Depending on the rehabilitation type, different changes in the subscales of the measure were observed, and these changes corresponded to the different emphasis and goals of the specific type of rehabilitation intervention. Similarly, changes in the subscales of the measure were observed in relation to the RAND groups formed by cluster analysis, which were logical and corresponded to the problem profiles of these groups. The confirmatory factor analysis indicated a two-factor solution: an index of the capacity for physical functioning (self-rated general health, bodily pain, physical functioning, physical role functioning) and an index of the capacity for psycho-social functioning (psychological well-being, social functioning, psychological role functioning and energy). These two indices describing functional capacity proved also to be sensitive to change. This two-factor solution seems to be usable for group level analyses when assessing the effects of rehabilitation. The moderately strong correlation between the RAND-36 and work ability index suggests that they partly measure the same phenomenon: perceived health-related quality of life, subjective capacity for activity and perceived work ability have strong links. As expected, the capacity for physical functioning had a stronger correlation with work ability index than with the capacity for psycho-social functioning. According to the present research, the RAND-36 measure can be considered as a screening method for rehabilitation orientation in relation to rehabilitation needs and as a follow-up measure for the health-related quality of life among the working age clients. The RAND-36 measure is also shown to be a useful instrument in estimating the benefits of rehabilitation as well as in effectiveness research.