Validating the 12-item proxy-administered World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 in young children with chronic physical illness in Canada.

PURPOSE: This study investigated the psychometric properties of the 12-item proxy-administered World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 in young children with chronic physical illness in Canada. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data come from the Multimorbidity in Youth across the Life-course, a longitudinal study of Canadian youth with physical illnesses (n = 263). Baseline parent-reported data from children (2-9 years, n = 143) and adolescents (10-16 years, n = 117) were analyzed. Wilcoxon's tests examined differences in WHODAS 2.0 scores between subgroups. Internal consistency was estimated, and confirmatory factor analysis modeled the WHODAS 2.0 factor structure. Regression modeling examined if the WHODAS 2.0 could discriminate between children with vs. without mental comorbidity. RESULTS: Differences were found between children and adolescents regarding self-care and getting along, and for the item on emotional affect. Inter-item correlations were similar between subgroups and internal consistency was strong for children (α = 0.90) and adolescents (α = 0.93). The factor structure of the WHODAS 2.0 was confirmed; parameter estimates were similar between subgroups. The association between mental comorbidity and disability did not differ by age - comorbidity was associated with greater disability (ß = 5.87, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The 12-item proxy-administered WHODAS 2.0 appears valid and reliable in young children with physical illness and can be used in this population.Implications for rehabilitationThe 12-item proxy-administered WHODAS 2.0 has acceptable inter-item correlations and internal consistency in young Canadian children with chronic physical illness, and its factor structure is consistent with previous reportsExpansion of its use in measuring disability in young children provides the opportunity to use the WHODAS 2.0 across the life-course, facilitating the interpretation of changes in disability over time or in response to treatmentAdditional research is needed to determine responsiveness to change and the minimal clinically important difference of the WHODAS 2.0 in this population.

Measurement invariance of the 12-item self-administered World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 across early and late adolescents in Canada.

PURPOSE: This study examined whether the 12-item self-administered World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 demonstrated measurement invariance between young adolescents aged 10-16 years with a physical illness and older adolescents aged 15-19 years from the general population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Young adolescent data come from the baseline wave of the Multimorbidity in Youth across the Life-course study (n = 117) and older adolescent data come from the Canadian Community Health Survey-Mental Health (n = 1851). Multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis was used to test measurement invariance. WHODAS 2.0 scores were compared across morbidity subgroups using multiple regression. RESULTS: Measurement invariance of the WHODAS 2.0 was demonstrated: (χ2=635.2(144), p<.001; RMSEA = 0.059 (0.054, 0.064); CFI = 0.967; TLI = 0.970; and, SRMR = 0.068). Adjusting for data source, sex, race, immigrant status, and household income, WHODAS 2.0 scores were associated with morbidity status in a dose-response manner: physical illness only (B = 1.50, p<.001), mental illness only (B = 2.92, p<.001), and physical-mental comorbidity (B = 4.44, p<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Measurement invariance of the WHODAS 2.0 suggests that young adolescents interpret the items and disability construct similarly to older adolescents - a group that previously demonstrated measurement invariance with an adult sample. The 12-item self-administered WHODAS 2.0 may be used to measure disability across the life-course. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONThe 12-item self-administered WHODAS 2.0 is one of the most widely used measures of disability and functioning.Measurement invariance of the WHODAS 2.0 suggests that young adolescents interpret the items and disability construct similarly to older adolescents and adults in Canada.Researchers and health professionals can be confident that differences in 12-item self-administered WHODAS 2.0 scores are real and meaningful.The 12-item self-administered WHODAS 2.0 may be used to measure disability across the life-course.

Agreement of the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 in parents and youth with physical illness living in Canada.

PURPOSE: This study modelled the factor structure and tested for measurement invariance between youth and parent reports on the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0; estimated agreement between informants; and, examined moderators of youth-parent discrepancies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data come from the baseline wave of the Multimorbidity in Youth across the Life-course study (n = 117). Multiple-group confirmatory factor analysis was used to test for measurement invariance and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests compared informant scores. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman limits of agreement plots were used to examine the youth-parent agreement. RESULTS: The WHODAS 2.0 demonstrated measurement invariance [χ2 = 221.8(136), p < 0.01; RMSEA = 0.073 (0.055, 0.091); CFI = 0.962; and, SRMR = 0.078]. Youth typically reported more disability compared to parent proxies, with the exception of item Q5 (emotional). The agreement was low (ICC = 0.08-0.53). Youth sex moderated informant agreement such that more consistent agreement was seen for female youth (ß = 0.54, p < .01) compared to male youth (ß = 0.11, p = .29). CONCLUSIONS: Youth and their parents interpret the construct of disability, as measured by the 12-item WHODAS 2.0, similarly. Thus, informant differences represent real differences that are not a consequence of error. Low parent-youth agreement reinforces the need for collecting multiple perspectives in the pediatric setting, especially for male youth.Implications for rehabilitationThe WHODAS 2.0 is one of the most widely used measures of disability and functioning.Measurement invariance of the WHODAS 2.0 suggests that youth and parents interpret the construct of disability similarly.Parent-youth agreement was low and youth typically report more disability compared to parent proxies.More consistent agreement with parents was found for female youth compared to male youth.

Canadian clinical capacity for fetal alcohol spectrum disorder assessment, diagnosis, disclosure and support to children and adolescents: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: Canadian fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) guidelines encourage an age-specific interdisciplinary diagnostic approach. However, there is currently no standard-of-care regarding FASD diagnosis disclosure and few studies document Canadian FASD clinical capacity. Our objectives were to describe clinical capacity (defined as skills and resources) for FASD assessment, diagnosis, disclosure and support in Canada. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Data were drawn from the CanDiD study, a cross-sectional investigation of Canadian FASD clinical capacity. Forty-one clinics participated in the study. Data were collected in 2021 on the number and types of health professionals included in the assessment and diagnostic teams, the presence (or absence) of a minor patient when the FASD diagnosis is disclosed to parents/guardians, who is responsible for the diagnosis disclosure, the use of explanatory tools, and the types of support/counselling services available. The proportion of clinics that follow the Canadian interdisciplinary diagnostic guidelines by age group is described among participating clinics. RESULTS: Overall, 21, 13 and 7 specialised FASD clinics were in Western/Northern, Central and Atlantic Canada, respectively. The number of referrals per year surpassed the number of diagnostic assessments completed in all regions. Approximately, 60% of clinics who diagnosed FASD in infants and preschool children (n=4/7 and 15/25, respectively) followed the interdisciplinary guidelines compared with 80% (n=32/40) in clinics who diagnosed school-aged children/adolescents. Diagnostic reporting practices were heterogeneous, but most used an explanatory tool with children/adolescents (67%), offered support/counselling (90-95%) and used case-by-case approach (80%) when deciding who would disclose the diagnosis to the child/adolescent and when. CONCLUSIONS: Limited diagnostic capacity and lack of FASD resources across Canada highlights a critical need for continued FASD support. This study identifies gaps in assessment, diagnosis and reporting practices for FASD in children/adolescents across Canada.