Utrecht Scale For Evaluation Of Rehabilitation Research Articles

Cognitive assessment during inpatient rehabilitation after spinal cord injury, a retrospective cross-sectional study.

Cross-sectional study. Cognitive screening is underdeveloped in spinal cord injury (SCI). Therefore, the objectives of our study were: (1) to evaluate cognitive functioning of rehabilitation inpatients with recently acquired spinal cord injury (SCI) with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA); (2) to analyse associations between patient and lesion characteristics and the MoCA scores and (3) to compare the MoCA with the cognitive domain of the Utrecht scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation (USER). Inpatient rehabilitation in a specialized rehabilitation centre in the Netherlands. MOCA and USER data of inpatients between November 2020 and December 2021 were used. Correlation and regression analysis were used. Included were 98 adults aged (median) 61.6 years (range 19.5-83.6), 66% male, 26.5% traumatic SCI, 63% persons with paraplegia. MoCA and USER scores were available for 83 and 92 individuals, respectively. In 44.6% of the participants, the MoCA score was below the cut-off. Age (r = 0.31, p = 0.005) and educational level (r = 0.54 P < 0.00) were significantly correlated to the MoCA score. The MoCA and the cognitive domain of the USER were moderately correlated (r = 0.25, p = 0.03). Almost half of the inpatients scored below the cut-off score on the MoCA. Since the MoCA is a validated cognitive screening tool, the moderate correlation of the MoCA and the cognitive domain of the USER suggests that the USER alone is not sufficient in detecting cognitive deficits. We recommend to screen for cognitive deficits in all people with new SCI. None.

Construct validity, responsiveness, and interpretability of the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation (USER) in patients admitted to inpatient geriatric rehabilitation

Objective The Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation is a multi-domain measurement with good content validity, structural validity and reliability for measuring physical functioning (mobility, selfcare) and cognitive functioning in geriatric rehabilitation. We aimed to determine the construct validity of both Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation scales and the responsiveness and interpretability of the scale for physical functioning in geriatric rehabilitation. Design Prospective follow-up study embedded in routine care. Setting Four care organisations in The Netherlands. Subjects Patients admitted for inpatient geriatric rehabilitation (2021–2022). Main measures Data collection included the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation, Mini-Mental State Examination, Barthel index, and a global rating scale anchor on recovery. Hypothesis testing was used to determine construct validity and responsiveness. For interpretability, minimal important change and floor and ceiling effects were determined. Results The mean age of participants (n = 211) was 77 (SD 10.4). Their mean length of stay was 38.6 days (SD 26.3), and 81% returned home. The Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation showed adequate construct validity, as all three hypotheses were confirmed for both scales. The Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation-physical function scale showed adequate responsiveness, with all five hypotheses confirmed. The mean change for physical function (scale range 0–70) was 15.5 points (SD 17.1). The minimal important change for Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation-physical function was 14.5 points difference for improvement. This scale showed no floor (2%) and ceiling effects (14%) at admission and discharge. Conclusions The Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation showed to be effective for evaluating physical functioning during geriatric rehabilitation as well as screening cognitive functioning. In total, 14.5 points difference has been established as a minimal important change for physical functioning.

Psychometrics of the observational scales of the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation (USER): Content and structural validity, internal consistency and reliability

Introduction: Establish content and structural validity, internal consistency, inter-rater reliability, and measurement error of the physical and cognitive scales of the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation clinical Rehabilitation (USER) in geriatric rehabilitation. Material and methods: First, an expert consensus-meeting (N=7) was organised for content validity wherein scale content validity index (CVI) was measured. Second, in a sample of geriatric rehabilitation patient structural validity (N=616) was assessed by confirmatory factor analyses for exploring unidimensionality. Cut-off criteria were: Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) ≤0.08; Comparative Fit Index (CFI) and Tucker Lewis Index (TLI) ≥0.95. Local independence (residual correlation<0.20) and monotonicity (Hi-coefficient ≥0.30 and Hs-coefficient ≥0.50) were also calculated. Cronbach alphas were calculated for internal consistency. Alpha's > 0.7 was considered adequate.Third, two nurses independently administered the USER to 37 patients. Intraclass-correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated for inter-rater reliability (IRR), standard error of measurement (SEM) and Smallest Detectable Change (SDC). Results: The CVI for physical functioning was moderate (0.73) and excellent for cognitive functioning (0.97). Structural validity physical scale was acceptable (CFI;0.95, TLI;0.93, RMSEA;0.07, ECV;0.78, OmegaH;0.87; Monotonicity;(Hi;0.52-0.75 and Hs;0.63)). Cognitive scale was good (CFI;0.98, TLI;0.96, RMSEA;0.05, ECV;0.66 and OmegaH;0.90. Monotonicity;(Hi;0.30 –0.70 and Hs;0.61)). Cronbach's alpha were high: physical scale;0.92 and cognitive scale;0.94. Reliability physical scale ICC;0.94, SEM;5 and SDC;14 and cognitive scale ICC;0.88, SEM;5 and SDC;13. Conclusion: The observational scales of the USER have shown sufficient content and structural validity, internal consistency, and interrater reliability for measuring physical and cognitive function in geriatric rehabilitation. Trial registration: N/A

Measures of Participation in Persons With Musculoskeletal Conditions.

Measures of Participation in Persons With Musculoskeletal Conditions.

Comparison of the responsiveness of the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation (USER) and the Barthel Index in stroke patients

Objective: To compare the responsiveness of the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation (USER) to the responsiveness of the Barthel Index in stroke patients in an inpatient rehabilitation facility. Design: Observational study. Setting: Inpatient rehabilitation facility. Subjects: Consecutive stroke patients admitted for clinical rehabilitation. Interventions: Not applicable. Main measures: The USER and the Barthel Index were administered by a nurse at admission and discharge. The Effect Size and Standardized Response Mean (SRM) were calculated as measures of responsiveness. Results: From 198 (78%) of the 254 patients who were included in the study period, both admission and discharge data were available. At admission the mean score of the USER subscale Functional independence was 43.1 (SD = 18.9) and at discharge the mean score was 59.3 (SD = 13.8). The mean score of the Barthel Index at admission was 13.3 (SD = 5.4) and at discharge 18.4 (SD = 3.3). The Effect Size of the USER subscales Mobility, Self-care, Cognitive functioning, Pain, Fatigue and Mood were 0.85, 0.77, 0.48, 0.19, 0.40 and 0.28, respectively, and of the Barthel Index 0.94. The results for the SRM were in the same range. Conclusion: In inpatient rehabilitation after stroke, the USER was less responsive than the Barthel Index.

Participation in the Chronic Phase of Stroke

Background: Participation is a multidimensional concept, consisting of an objective and a subjective dimension. Many studies have focused on determinants of only 1 dimension of participation post stroke. Objective: To describe participation (both objective and subjective) and to determine how physical and cognitive independence and subjective complaints (pain, fatigue, and mood) influence participation in community-dwelling stroke survivors in the Netherlands. Methods: The Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation (USER) measures physical and cognitive independence and subjective complaints. USER-Participation measures 3 dimensions of participation: frequency (objective perspective), restrictions (subjective perspective), and satisfaction (subjective perspective). Spearman correlations and backward linear regression analyses were used to analyze associations between the 3 USER-Participation scores with demographics, stroke characteristics, physical and cognitive independence, and subjective complaints. Results: Of the 111 participants, 48.5% returned to work post stroke, but mostly for only 1 to 16 hours a week. Experienced participation restrictions were most prevalent in physical exercise, chores in/around the house, housekeeping, and outdoor activities. On average, participants were relatively satisfied with their participation, but dissatisfaction occurred in cognition, activities outdoors, and work/housekeeping. Regression analysis revealed that objective participation was determined by physical and cognitive independence, age, and education, whereas subjective participation was determined by physical and cognitive independence, fatigue, and mood. Conclusions: Most participants experienced participation problems, despite relatively good physical recovery. In addition to physical and cognitive factors, subjective complaints of persons with stroke should be addressed in the rehabilitation program.

Participation in the Chronic Phase of Stroke

Background: Participation is a multidimensional concept, consisting of an objective and a subjective dimension. Many studies have focused on determinants of only 1 dimension of participation post stroke. Objective: To describe participation (both objective and subjective) and to determine how physical and cognitive independence and subjective complaints (pain, fatigue, and mood) influence participation in community-dwelling stroke survivors in the Netherlands. Methods: The Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation (USER) measures physical and cognitive independence and subjective complaints. USER-Participation measures 3 dimensions of participation: frequency (objective perspective), restrictions (subjective perspective), and satisfaction (subjective perspective). Spearman correlations and backward linear regression analyses were used to analyze associations between the 3 USER-Participation scores with demographics, stroke characteristics, physical and cognitive independence, and subjective complaints. Results: Of the 111 participants, 48.5% returned to work post stroke, but mostly for only 1 to 16 hours a week. Experienced participation restrictions were most prevalent in physical exercise, chores in/around the house, housekeeping, and outdoor activities. On average, participants were relatively satisfied with their participation, but dissatisfaction occurred in cognition, activities outdoors, and work/housekeeping. Regression analysis revealed that objective participation was determined by physical and cognitive independence, age, and education, whereas subjective participation was determined by physical and cognitive independence, fatigue, and mood. Conclusions: Most participants experienced participation problems, despite relatively good physical recovery. In addition to physical and cognitive factors, subjective complaints of persons with stroke should be addressed in the rehabilitation program.

Article 3: Responsiveness of the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation

Objective: To examine the validity and responsiveness of the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation (USER), a generic measure covering mobility, self-care, cognition, pain, fatigue, and mood. Design: Longitudinal study with measurements at admission and at discharge from clinical rehabilitation, with a maximum period between measurements of 4 months. Setting: 3 rehabilitation facilities in The Netherlands. Participants: Rehabilitation inpatients with different diagnoses (N=319). Interventions: Not applicable.