4 resultados para FCE
em University of Queensland eSpace - Australia
Resumo:
Functional capacity evaluation (FCE) is a widely used tool in work rehabilitation, despite the limited examination of the soundness of its measurement properties. This paper outlines the development of a new approach to FCE, the GAPP FCE, and reports on the findings of an expert review of aspects of its content validity and technical adequacy and how it meets established test criteria. Five expert occupational therapists reviewed the materials of the GAPP FCE then completed a questionnaire related to the content validity, technical adequacy and safety, reliability, validity, practicality and utility of the GAPP FCE. The experts gave support to most aspects of these criteria. The main issue identified by the review was related to interpretation and extrapolation of the FCE results for return to work. This and other issues are discussed in relation to recent developments in FCE and plans for future development of the GAPP FCE.
Resumo:
Objectives: To report the research and development of a new approach to Functional Capacity Evaluation, the Gibson Approach to Functional Capacity Evaluation (GAPP FCE) for chronic back pain clients. Methods: Four Studies, including pilot and feasibility testing, expert review, and preliminary interrater reliability examination, are described here. Participants included 7 healthy young adults and 19 rehabilitation clients with back pain who underwent assessment using the GAPP FCE. Thirteen therapists were trained in the approach and were silently observed administering the Functional Capacity Evalutions by at least 1 other trained therapists or the first investigator Or both. An expert review using 5 expert occupational therapists was also conducted. Results: Study 1, the pilot with healthy individuals, indicated that the GAPP FCE was a feasible approach with good utility. Study 2, a pilot using 2 trained therapists assessing 5 back pain clients, supported the clinical feasibility of the approach. The expert review in Study 3 found support for GAPP FCE. Study 4, a trial of the approach with 14 rehabilitation clients, found support for the interrater reliability of recommendations for return to work based on performance in the GAPP FCE. Discussion: The evidence thus far available supports the GAPP FCE as ail approach that provides a Sound method for evaluating the performance of the physical demands of work with clients with chronic back pain. The tool has been shown to have good face and content validity, to meet acceptable test standards, and to have reasonable interrater reliability. Further research is occurring to look at a larger interrater reliability study, to further examine content validity, and to examine predictive validity.
Resumo:
Although safety is recognized as a critical issue in functional capacity evaluations (FCEs), it has rarely been investigated. This paper reports on the findings of a study which examined safety aspects of a new approach to FCE. Fourteen rehabilitation clients with chronic back pain participated in the study. Aspects examined included the pre-FCE screening procedures, the monitoring of performance and safety during the FCE, and the end of FCE measures and follow-up procedures. Support was found for the screening procedures of the approach, particularly blood pressure measurement, and for the combined approach to monitoring of the persons performance from biomechanical, physiological and psychophysical perspectives. Issues for FCE safety in general are identified and discussed, including the importance of screening procedures to determine readiness for FCEs and the issue of load handling in FCEs, especially in relation to clients with chronic back pain.
Resumo:
This study assessed the item validity of 15 of the physical demands from the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT), as evaluated in a new approach to functional capacity evaluation (FCE) for clients with chronic back pain, the Gibson Approach to FCE (GAPP FCE). Fifty-two occupational therapists were sent the specifications of the items in the GAPP FCE procedures and were asked to rate the items in terms of item-objective congruence, relevance and difficulty. A response rate of 59.2% was obtained. The majority of the therapists agreed that most of the items were congruent with the objectives based on the definition of the physical demands from the DOT. The items evaluating Balancing and Pushing and Pulling had the lowest item-objective congruence. The evaluation of Balancing and the Lifting, Carrying and Pushing and Pulling of loads greater than light-medium weight (10–16 kg) were not considered significantly relevant. Concerns were raised about the difficulty and safety of the evaluation of Lifting, Carrying and Pushing and Pulling with clients with chronic back pain, particularly if the therapist evaluates the manual handling of medium to heavy loads. These results may have implications for other FCEs, particularly those which are based on the DOT, or when assessing clients with chronic back pain.