Title: Functional assessments used by occupational therapists with older adults at risk of activity and participation limitations: a systematic review and evaluation of measurement properties | Systematic Reviews | Full Text
Headings: Functional assessments used by occupational therapists with older adults at risk of activity and participation limitations: a systematic review and evaluation of measurement properties
Functional assessments used by occupational therapists with older adults at risk of activity and participation limitations: a systematic review and evaluation of measurement properties
Abstract
Background
Methods/design
Discussion
Background
Review questions
Types of publications/studies
Settings and participants
Types of methods
Types of outcomes
Search methods for the identification of studies
Methods/design
Screening
Systematic review process.
Data management
Data extraction
Risk of bias assessment
Data analysis
Phase two, measurement property evaluation
Discussion
Abbreviations
ADL:
COSMIN:
ICF:
MeSH:
References
Acknowledgements
Author information
Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Competing interests
Authors’ contributions
Electronic supplementary material
Additional file 1: OVID Medline Search Strategy (Phase 1). (DOCX 30 KB)
Authors’ original submitted files for images
Authors’ original file for figure 1
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Share this article
Keywords
Advertisement

Content: Law and Letts, 1989, conducted a literature search of assessment tools used to predict or evaluate activities of daily living (ADL). Authors reviewed the: 1) purpose of scale, 2) clinical utility, 3) scale construction, 4) standardisation, and 5) reliability and validity of identified assessments [ 20 ]. The authors concluded that no new ADL assessments should be created; instead, further research should be conducted to enhance current assessments. The Index of ADL, Barthel Index, the revised level of rehabilitation scale and physical maintenance scale were found to have the highest reliability and validity of those reviewed. The population and setting of interest was not specified by authors, which creates difficulty in translating results to practice. A similarly conducted study by Klein et al ., 2008, compared 18 functional assessments to the Canadian Model of Occupational Performance to determine whether the assessment measured key occupational therapy perspectives [ 21 ]. Again, no information relating to population of interest or setting was provided, and no decisions relating to which assessment should be used in practice were made.