Application of participation in clinical practice: Key issues.

BACKGROUND: Rehabilitation services are increasingly targeting involvement in daily life. In the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health this is referred to as "participation". How-ever, questions have arisen regarding the conceptualization of participation, and consensus is lacking. METHODS: The first phase of this study is a critical review of the literature to detect recurring conceptual problems in the application of participation and how researchers deal with these. The second phase is a systematic review to identify how participation measures are operationalized. RESULTS: The critical review found possible solutions to 4 recurring key limitations: (i) how to deal with ambiguity and vagueness regarding the term "participation"; (ii) how to differentiate between activity and participation; (iii) what is the current empirical knowledge about the subjective aspects of participation; (iv) what are the different ways to measure participation. The systematic review found 18 instruments operationalizing participation in different ways: (i) unidimensional: frequency of performing activities; (ii) unidimensional: limitations in experiencing participation when performing activities; (iii) multidimensional: multiple subjective dimensions when performing activities; and (iv) multidimensional: objective and subjective dimensions. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Notwithstanding an increasing body of knowledge, some issues remain unclear and how participation is measured is subject to debate. This results in difficulties in the use of participation in clinical practice. However, insight into the current body of knowledge and awareness of shortcomings might help clinicians who aim to apply participation in practice.

Measuring participation as defined by the World Health Organization in the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Psychometric properties of the Ghent Participation Scale.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the internal consistency, test-retest reliability, construct validity, discriminant validity and responsiveness of the Ghent Participation Scale. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study with a test-retest sample. SETTING: Six outpatient rehabilitation centres in Belgium. SUBJECTS: A total of 365 outpatients from eight diagnostic groups. MEASURES: The Ghent Participation Scale, the Impact on Participation and Autonomy, the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation-Participation and the Medical outcome study Short Form SF-36. RESULTS: The Ghent Participation Scale was found to have good internal consistency (Cronbach's α between 0.75 and 0.83). At item level, the test-retest reliability was good; weighted kappas ranged between 0.57 and 0.88. On the dimension level intraclass correlation coefficients ranged between 0.80 and 0.90. Evidence for construct validity came from high correlations between the subscales of the Ghent Participation Scale and four subscales of the Impact on Participation and Autonomy (range, r = -0.71 to -0.87) and two subscales of the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation-Participation (range, r = 0.54 to 0.72). Standardized response mean ranged between 0.23 and 0.68 and the area under the curve ranged between 68% and 88%. CONCLUSION: The Ghent Participation Scale appears to be a valid and reliable method of assessing participation irrespective of the respondent's health condition. The Ghent Participation Scale is responsive and is able to detect changes over time.