Development and standardization of the Self-regulation Skills Interview (SRSI): A new clinical assessment tool for acquired brain injury

The Self-regulation Skills Interview (SRSI) is a clinical tool designed to measure a range of metacognitive skills essential for rehabilitation planning, monitoring an individual's progress, and evaluating the outcome of treatment interventions. The results of the present study indicated that the SRSI has sound interrater reliability and test-retest reliability. A principle components analysis revealed three SRSI factors: Awareness, Readiness to Change, and Strategy Behavior. A comparison between a group of 61 participants with acquired brain injury (ABI) and a group of 43 non-brain-injured participants indicated that the participants with ABI had significantly lower levels of Awareness and Strategy Behavior, but that level of Readiness to Change was not significantly different between the two groups. The significant relationship observed between the SRSI factors and measures of neuropsychological functioning confirmed the concurrent validity of the scale and supports the value of the SRSI for post-acute assessment.

A rapid dietary assessment tool to determine intake of folate was developed and validated

Background and Objective: Estimates of dietary folate intake are currently of considerable interest, but no rapid tools are available to assess dietary intake of folate that are well suited to everyday health promotion activities, We developed and tested the reliability and validity of two prototypes of a rapid dietary assessment tool (a folate intake tool, FIT) to determine dietary intake of folate. Study Design and Setting: Five hundred and sixty eight men and women aged 33-93 years from Perth, Western Australia. Completed one of the two prototypes of the tool and gave a fasting blood sample for measurement of serum folate. A subset (n - 277) of participants completed the same tool on a second occasion 3-6 weeks later. Results: The Pearson correlations (r) between folate score from the tool and serum folate were moderately high for both prototypes (FIT-A r = 0.54-, FIT-B r = 0.49). The folate scores for the two prototypes were similar on repeat testing and correlated strongly (FIT-A r = 0.75; FIT-B r = 0.68). Conclusions: The rapid dietary assessment tool described here, FIT, provides a valid and reliable measurement of dietary intake of folate for both men and women. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Standardizing assessment of adverse effects in rheumatology clinical trials. Status of OMERACT Toxicity Working Group March 2000: Towards a common understanding of comparative toxicity/safety profiles for antirheumatic therapies

This paper describes the background and current status of an OMERACT facilitated effort to improve the consistency of adverse event reporting in rheumatology clinical trials, The overall goal is the development of an adverse event assessment tool that would provide a basis for use of common terminology and improve the consistency of reporting severity of side effects within rheumatology clinical trials and during postmarketing surveillance. The resulting Rheumatology Common Toxicity Criteria Index encompassed the following organ systems: allergic/immunologic, cardiac, ENT, gastrointestinal, musculoskeletal, neuropsychiatric, ophthalmologic, pulmonary and skin/integument. Before this tool is widely accepted, its validity, consistency, and feasibility need to be assessed in clinical trials.

Screening for physical activity in family practice - Evaluation of two brief assessment tools

Background: Physical activity (PA) is relevant to the prevention and management of many health conditions in family practice. There is a need for an efficient, reliable, and valid assessment tool to identify patients in need of PA interventions. Methods: Twenty-eight family physicians in three Australian cities assessed the PA of their adult patients during 2004 using either a two- (2Q) or three-question (3Q) assessment. This was administered again approximately 3 days later to evaluate test-retest reliability. Concurrent validity was evaluated by measuring agreement with the Active Australia Questionnaire, and criterion validity by comparison with 7-day Computer Science Applications, Inc. (CSA) accelerometer counts. Results: A total of 509 patients participated, with 428 (84%) completing a repeat assessment, and 415 (82%) accelerometer monitoring. The brief assessments had moderate test-retest reliability (2Q k = 58.0%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 47.2-68.8%; 3Q k = 55.6%, 95% CI = 43.8-67.4%); fair to moderate concurrent validity (2Q k = 46.7%, 95% CI = 35.657.9%; 3Q k = 38.7%, 95% CI = 26.4-51.1%); and poor to fair criterion validity (2Q k = 18.2%, 95% CI = 3.9-32.6%; 3Q k = 24.3%, 95% CI = 11.6-36.9%) for identifying patients as sufficiently active. A four-level scale of PA derived from the PA assessments was significantly correlated with accelerometer minutes (2Q rho = 0.39, 95% CI = 0.28-0.49; 3Q rho = 0.31, 95% CI = 0.18-0.43). Physicians reported that the assessments took I to 2 minutes to complete. Conclusions: Both PA assessments were feasible to use in family practice, and were suitable for identifying the least active patients. The 2Q assessment was preferred by clinicians and may be most appropriate for dissemination.

Reliability and validity of a brief physical activity assessment for use by family doctors

Objective: To evaluate the reliability and validity of a brief physical activity assessment tool suitable for doctors to use to identify inactive patients in the primary care setting. Methods: Volunteer family doctors (n = 8) screened consenting patients (n = 75) for physical activity participation using a brief physical activity assessment tool. Inter-rater reliability was assessed within one week (n = 71). Validity was assessed against an objective physical activity monitor (computer science and applications accelerometer; n = 42). Results: The brief physical activity assessment tool produced repeatable estimates of sufficient total physical activity, correctly classifying over 76% of cases (kappa 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.33 to 0.72). The validity coefficient was reasonable (kappa 0.40, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.69), with good percentage agreement (71%). Conclusions: The brief physical activity assessment tool is a reliable instrument, with validity similar to that of more detailed self report measures of physical activity. It is a tool that can be used efficiently in routine primary healthcare services to identify insufficiently active patients who may need physical activity advice.

A randomized and controlled trial of a participative ergonomics intervention to reduce injuries associated with manual tasks: physical risk and legislative

A participative ergonomics approach to reducing injuries associated with manual tasks is widely promoted; however only limited evidence from uncontrolled trials has been available to support the efficacy of such an approach. This paper reports on a randomized and controlled trial of PErforM, a participative ergonomics intervention designed to reduce the risks of injury associated with manual tasks. One hundred and seventeen small to medium sized food, construction, and health workplaces were audited by government inspectors using a manual tasks risk assessment tool (ManTRA). Forty-eight volunteer workplaces were then randomly assigned to Experimental and Control groups with the Experimental group receiving the PErforM program. Inspectors audited the workplaces again, 9 months following the intervention. The results showed a significant decrease in estimates of manual task risk and suggested better legal compliance in the Experimental group.