Abstract
Study design
Psychometric study including exploratory factor analysis and Rasch analysis.
Objective
The aim of the present study was to examine the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) in terms of its dimensionality and metric properties in a sample of people with spinal cord injury (SCI).
Setting
Two hundred and thirty-nine hospitals in Taiwan
Methods
Secondary analysis of cross-sectional data from the National Disability Determination System in Taiwan, including data of individuals with more than 1-year chronic spinal cord injury and over 18 years of age. We would ask the all 6 domains of WHODAS 2.0, except those participants who were not working in present, based on the WHODAS 2.0 manual.
Results
Data from 521 persons were included. The internal consistency of WHODAS 2.0 was high for all six domains (Cronbach’s α between 0.87–0.99). The exploratory factor analysis supported the original six domain structure of WHODAS 2.0 to a large extent. Rasch analysis provided domain scores usable for measurement at the individual level and an overall WHODAS 2.0 score that takes into account the multidimensionality of the instrument.
Conclusions
WHODAS 2.0 provides a reliable and valid instrument to measure relevant aspects of “activity and participation” in the context of functioning in people with SCI in Taiwan and may guide their rehabilitation.
Similar content being viewed by others
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
Data archiving
The data that support the findings of this study are available from Ministry of Health and Welfare in Taiwan but restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under license for the current study, and so are not publically available. Data are however available from the authors upon reasonable request and with permission of Ministry of Health and Welfare in Taiwan.
References
Teng SW, Yen CF, Liao HF, Chang KH, Chi WC, Wang YH, et al. Evolution of system for disability assessment based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health: A Taiwanese study. J Formos Med Assoc. 2013;112:691–8.
World Health Organization W. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.
Chiu WT, Yen CF, Teng SW, Liao HF, Chang KH, Chi WC, et al. Implementing disability evaluation and welfare services based on the framework of the international classification of functioning, disability and health: experiences in Taiwan. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013;13:416.
Yen CF, Hwang AW, Liou TH, Chiu TY, Hsu HY, Chi WC, et al. Validity and reliability of the Functioning Disability Evaluation Scale-Adult Version based on the WHODAS 2.0—36 items. J Formos Med Assoc. 2014;113:839–49.
Chiu TY, Yen CF, Chou CH, Lin JD, Hwang AW, Liao HF, et al. Development of traditional Chinese version of World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0 36—item (WHODAS 2.0) in Taiwan: validity and reliability analyses. Res Dev Disabil. 2014;35:2812–20.
Tractenberg RE. Classical and modern measurement theories, patient reports, and clinical outcomes. Contemp Clin Trials. 2010;31:1–3.
Gabbe BJ, Lyons RA, Simpson PM, Rivara FP, Ameratunga S, Polinder S, et al. Disability weights based on patient-reported data from a multinational injury cohort. Bull World Health Organ. 2016;94:806C–16.
World Health Organization W. International perspectives on spinal cord injury. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2014.
Ning GZ, Yu TQ, Feng SQ, Zhou XH, Ban DX, Liu Y, et al. Epidemiology of traumatic spinal cord injury in Tianjin, China. Spinal Cord. 2011;49:386–90.
Kuo C-Y, Liou T-H, Chang K-H, Chi W-C, Escorpizo R, Yen C-F, et al. Functioning and disability analysis of patients with traumatic brain injury and spinal cord injury by using the world health organization disability assessment schedule 2.0. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2015;12:4116–27.
Garin O, Ayuso-Mateos JL, Almansa J, Nieto M, Chatterji S, Vilagut G, et al. Validation of the "World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule, WHODAS-2" in patients with chronic diseases. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2010;8:51.
Chang K-H, Liao H-F, Yen C-F, Hwang A-W, Chi W-C, Escorpizo R, et al. Association between muscle power impairment and WHODAS 2.0 in older adults with physical disability in Taiwan. Disabil Rehabil. 2015;37:712–20.
Üstün TB, Kostanjsek N, Chatterji S, Rehm J. Measuring health and disability: manual for WHO disability assessment schedule WHODAS 2.0. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010.
Wolf AC, Tate RL, Lannin NA, Middleton J, Lane-Brown A, Cameron ID. The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Scale, WHODAS II: reliability and validity in the measurement of activity and participation in a spinal cord injury population. J Rehabil Med. 2012;44:747–55.
Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika. 1951;16:297–334.
Rasch GW. Probabilistic Models for some Intelligence and Attainment Tests, Copenhagen, 1960.
Yen W. Performance assessments: strategies for managing local item dependence. J Educ Meas. 1993;30:187–213.
Wainer H, Kiely GL. Item clusters and computer adaptive testing: a case for testlets. J Educ Meas. 1987;24:185–210.
Masters GN, Wright BD. The Partial Credit Model. In: van der Linden WJ, Hambleton RK, (eds.) Handbook of Modern Item Response Theory. New York, NY: Springer New York; 1997. p. 101–21. .
Raîche G. Critical eigenvalue sizes (variances) in standardized residual principal components analysis. Rasch Meas Trans. 2005;19:1012.
Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales : a practical guide to their development and use. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008.
Bond T, Fox CM. Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental Measurement in the Human Sciences. UK: Taylor & Francis; 2015.
Reinhardt JD, Post MW, Fekete C, Trezzini B, Brinkhof MW. Labor Market integration of people with disabilities: Results from the Swiss Spinal Cord Injury Cohort Study. PLoS ONE. 2016;11:e0166955.
Posl M, Cieza A, Stucki G. Psychometric properties of the WHODASII in rehabilitation patients. Qual Life Res. 2007;16:1521–31.
Duncan PW, Bode RK, Min Lai S, Perera S. Rasch analysis of a new stroke-specific outcome scale: the Stroke Impact Scale. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;84:950–63.
Andrich D. An index of person separation in latent trait theory, the traditional KR-20 index and the Guttman scale response pattern. Educ Res Pers. 1982;9:95.
Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE, Tatham RL. Multivariate data analysis. NJ: PearsonPrentice Hall Upper Saddle River; 2006.
Baghaei P. Local dependency and Rasch measures. Trans Rasch Meas. 2007;21:1105–6.
Kucukdeveci AA, Kutlay S, Yildizlar D, Oztuna D, Elhan AH, Tennant A. The reliability and validity of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS-II) in stroke. Disabil Rehabil. 2013;35:214–20.
Tennant A, Penta M, Tesio L, Grimby G, Thonnard JL, Slade A, et al. Assessing and adjusting for cross-cultural validity of impairment and activity limitation scales through differential item functioning within the framework of the Rasch model: the PRO-ESOR project. Med Care. 2004;42(1 Suppl):I37–48.
Acknowledgements
We thank the Swiss Paraplegic Research (SPF) in Switzerland for its kind support and the ICF team in Taiwan. Special thanks also to Christine Richards of the University of Vermont's Department of Rehabilitation and Movement Science, and Melissa Selb from SPF for their assistance in the editing of this manuscript.
Funding
This research was financially supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology of Taiwan, MOST (104-2917-I-320 -001). All authors declare sources of funding material not available commercially.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
T-YC was responsible for writing the manuscript, conducting the statistical analysis, interpreting the results, and the discussion. RE and CFY were responsible supervised for the whole study, screening potentially eligible studies, and providing feedback on the manuscript. MEF and CSF conducted the statistical analyses, supported the writing of the manuscript of methods, results, and discussion and provided feedback on the entire manuscript. T-HL. and C-FY contributed to the data extraction and provided feedback on the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval
The study was approved by the Tzu-Chi research ethics committee (IRB-104-4-A)
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chiu, TY., Finger, M.E., Fellinghauer, C.S. et al. Validation of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 in adults with spinal cord injury in Taiwan: a psychometric study. Spinal Cord 57, 516–524 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-018-0231-7
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Version of record:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41393-018-0231-7
