What makes the difference in people's lives when they have a mental disorder?

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to identify which environmental factors are the most responsible for the disability experienced by persons with mental disorders and whether they differ (1) from those in cardiovascular diseases, chronic respiratory conditions, diabetes, and cancer, and (2) depending on the capacity level-a proxy for the impact of health conditions on the health state of individuals. METHODS: Nationally representative data from 12,265 adults in Chile collected in 2015 with the WHO Model Disability Survey was analyzed. RESULTS: The availability of personal assistance, frequency of receiving personal assistance, and assistive devices for mobility were the most important environmental factors across mental and other non-communicable diseases. Perception of discrimination and use of health services were also prominent factors. There was a huge overlap between the factors found relevant for mental and other non-communicable diseases, but a substantial variability depending on the intensity of difficulties in capacity. CONCLUSIONS: This study challenges the appropriateness of disease-specific approaches and suggests that considering intrinsic capacity levels is more informative than focusing on diagnosis alone when comparing needs and barriers that affect the performance in daily life of specific groups of individuals.

Setting up a cohort study of functioning: From classification to measurement.

OBJECTIVE: Cohort studies are an appropriate method for the collection of population-based longitudinal data to track people's health and functioning over time. However, describing and understanding functioning in its complexity with all its determinants is one of the biggest challenges faced by clinicians and researchers. DESIGN: This paper focuses on the development of a cohort study on functioning, outlining the relevant steps and related methods, and illustrating these with reference to the Swiss Spinal Cord Injury Cohort Study (SwiSCI). METHODS AND RESULTS: In setting up a cohort study the initial step is to specify which variables are to be included, i.e. what to assess. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) is valuable in this process. The second step is to identify how to assess the specified ICF categories. Existing instruments and assessments can then be linked to the ICF. CONCLUSION: The methods outlined here enable the development of a cohort study to be based on a comprehensive perspective of health, operationalized through functioning as conceptualized and classified in the ICF, yet to remain efficient and feasible to administer.

A systematic literature review of outcome measures for upper extremity function using the international classification of functioning, disability, and health as reference.

OBJECTIVE: To provide information regarding the (1) responsiveness and reliability of different outcome measures used with persons who have impairments in upper extremity function and (2) their content validity based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and EMBASE databases were systematically searched for studies on outcome measures used to evaluate upper extremity function; only studies written in English and published between July 1997 and July 2010 were considered. STUDY SELECTION: One investigator reviewed titles and abstracts of the identified studies to determine whether the studies met predefined eligibility criteria (eg, study design, age <18 years). Another investigator did the same for 70% of the studies. DATA EXTRACTION: All types of outcome measures in the included studies were extracted, and the information retrieved from these outcome measures was linked to the ICF by 2 independent investigators who used standardized linking rules. In addition, studies reporting the clinical responsiveness, interrater reliability, and test-retest reliability of the outcome measures were identified. DATA SYNTHESIS: From among the 894 studies that were included in this review, 17 most frequently used outcome measures in the different study populations were identified. Five were patient-reported outcome measures and 12 were clinical outcome measures. The outcome measures show large variability with regard to the areas of functioning and disability addressed. Reliability and responsiveness data are missing for a few outcome measures or for certain populations for which they have been used. CONCLUSION: This systematic review provides an overview of the outcome measures used to address functioning and disability as they are related to the upper extremity. The results of this study may help clinicians and researchers select the most appropriate outcome measure for their clinical population or research question according to ICF-based content validity, and additional information on the reliability and responsiveness of the measures is provided. Our findings also can provide directions for further research.

Visual perception and appraisal of persons with impairments: a randomised controlled field experiment using photo elicitation.

PURPOSE: Visual cues from persons with impairments may trigger stereotypical generalisations that lead to prejudice and discrimination. The main objective of this pilot study is to examine whether visual stimuli of impairment activate latent prejudice against disability and whether this connection can be counteracted with priming strategies. METHODS: In a field experiment, participants were asked to rate photographs showing models with mental impairments, wheelchair users with paraplegia, and persons without any visible impairment. Participants should appraise the models with regard to several features (e.g. communicativeness, intelligence). One hundred participants rated 12 photo models yielding a total of 1183 observations. One group of participants was primed with a cover story introducing visual perception of impairment as the study's gist, while controls received neutral information. RESULTS: Photo models with mental impairments were rated lowest and models without visible impairment highest. In participants who did not have prior contacts with persons with impairments, priming led to a levelling of scores of models with and without impairment. Prior contacts with persons with impairments created similar effects as the priming. Unexpectedly, a pattern of converse double discrimination to the disadvantage of men with mental impairments was revealed. CONCLUSION: Signs of stereotypical processing of visual cues of impairment have been found in participants of the Swiss general population. Personal contact with persons with impairments as well as priming participants seems to reduce stereotyping.