Could an increased risk of obstructive sleep apnoea be one of the determinants associated with disability in individuals with cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases?

PURPOSE: To investigate a possible association between the risk of obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) and disability in individuals with cardiovascular or cerebrovascular diseases. METHODS: Cross-sectional study was conducted with 373 individuals (313 with cardiovascular or cerebrovascular diseases and 60 healthy). Disability was assessed by the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS), and the risk of OSA was assessed by STOP-BANG. Anxiety and depression symptoms, daytime sleepiness, and cognition were assessed by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), and Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE). RESULTS: Greater disability was found in individuals with intermediate or high risk of OSA, considering healthy individuals (p=0.03), or individuals diagnosed with arrhythmia (p<0.01) or coronary artery disease (p=0.04). A high risk of OSA and higher WHODAS scores was significant among women as well as between OSA risk categories (p<0.01). Cognitive deficit and level of education also showed differences between OSA risk categories. Age, depression, and sleepiness were also associated with the subjects' disability (p<0.01). Gamma regression model showed higher WHODAS scores in female, in those with intermediate and high risk of OSA, and in those with depressive symptoms and cognitive deficit. Age also showed a correlation with higher WHODAS scores. The presence of all investigated cardio and cerebrovascular diseases showed an increase in the WHODAS score, implying a greater disability compared to healthy individuals. CONCLUSION: Moderate and high risk of OSA is associated with disability, as well as gender, age, depressive symptoms, cognitive deficit, and cardiovascular diseases.

Which Components of The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) are Covered by Cardiac Rehabilitation Assessment Tools among Individuals with Heart Failure?

BACKGROUND: The therapeutic assessment of functioning in cardiac rehabilitation from the perspective of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) can provide a biopsychosocial approach to health care. However, it is unclear which components are reflected in the instruments used for cardiac rehabilitation in individuals with heart failure (HF). OBJECTIVES: To investigate which ICF components (body function, structures, activities, participation, environmental factors, and personal factors) are represented in the assessment instruments used in individuals with HF and to identify the most appropriate instrument to use based on the inclusion of these factors. METHODS: Forty-four clinical trials included in an updated Cochrane systematic review that investigated the effects of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation in patients with HF were reviewed. The instruments were analyzed to extract significant concepts linked to the ICF codes. RESULTS: A total of 12 outcomes and 40 instruments were identified. The concepts were linked to 2466 codes in the following ICF components: body functions (41.8%), activities (29.7%), participation (8.4%), environmental factors (3.8%), personal factors (1.3%), and body structures (1.0%); other concepts (13.9%) were classified as not covered by ICF. None of the instruments presented concepts linked to all ICF components. The Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ), however, demonstrated comprehensive coverage of the ICF components, with the exception of body structure. CONCLUSIONS: Body function was the most frequently detected ICF component. Individual instruments did not provide a comprehensive perspective on the functioning level of individuals with HF. The MLHFQ provided the greatest coverage of ICF components.

Chest physiotherapy techniques administered by certified specialists to hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in Brazil: A look towards future practice.

BACKGROUND: Chest physiotherapy for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 has been poorly reported. Although recommendations were published to guide physiotherapists, practice might have differed depending on education and training. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the differences in chest physiotherapy applied for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 between certified specialists and non-certified specialists. METHODS: An online questionnaire survey was developed for physiotherapists involved in the management of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The questionnaire inquired about professional information and characteristics of physiotherapy practice. RESULTS: There were 485 respondents, yielding a completion rate of 76%. Of these, 61 were certified specialists and 424 non-certified specialists. The certified specialists were older, had more years of professional experience, were more qualified, and had better job conditions. For mechanically ventilated patients, the certified specialists used the ventilator hyperinflation maneuver more frequently (50.4% vs 35.1%, p = 0.005), and the hard/brief expiratory rib cage compression (ERCC) (26.9% vs 48.3%, p = 0.016), soft/long ERCC (25.2% vs 39.1%, p = 0.047), and manual chest compression-decompression (MCCD) maneuver (22.4% vs 35.6%, p = 0.001) less often. For spontaneously breathing patients, the certified specialists used the active cycle of breathing technique (30.8% vs 67.1%, p<0.001), autogenic drainage (7.7% vs 20.7%, p = 0.017), and MCCD maneuver (23.1% vs 41.4%, p = 0.018) less frequently. CONCLUSIONS: Certified specialists with higher levels of expertise seem to prefer the use of chest physiotherapy techniques that are applied with the mechanical ventilator over manual techniques. Furthermore, they use techniques that could potentially increase the work of breathing less frequently, mitigating the risk of exacerbating respiratory conditions in patients with COVID-19.

Is it time to rethink disability assessment in low back pain? Reliability, internal consistency, and construct validity of the Brazilian WHODAS 2.0 for chronic low back pain.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The World Health Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) was developed to assess health and disability based on the biopsychosocial model. The WHODAS 2.0 has not been validated for Brazilians with chronic non-specific low back pain (LBP). We aimed to evaluate the reliability, internal consistency, and construct validity of the Brazilian version of the WHODAS 2.0 in patients with chronic LBP. METHODS: Methodological study. The Brazilian version of the WHODAS 2.0 was applied to 100 volunteers with chronic nonspecific LBP. Test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and construct validity were assessed using the Spearman correlation test, Cronbach's alpha (α) coefficient, and Spearman's correlation test between WHODAS 2.0, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), and Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ), respectively. RESULTS: WHODAS 2.0 showed satisfactory test-retest reliability with a moderate correlation for total WHODAS 2.0 (r = 0.75, p < 0.05). Internal consistency was adequate for all domains and total score (α = 0.82-0.96). Regarding construct validity, WHODAS 2.0, ODI (r = 0.70, p < 0.05), and WHODAS 2.0 and RMDQ (r = 0.71, p < 0.05) had significant correlations. Total WHODAS 2.0 and FABQ-Phys subscale scores correlated moderately (r = 0.66, p < 0.05). DISCUSSION: The Brazilian WHODAS 2.0 was proved to be a valid and reliable tool for patients with chronic LBP. The item referring to sexual intercourse had 27% and 30% of the missing values during the test and retest stage, respectively and had a high percentage of missing data for work-related questions (41% missing data) in the life activities domain; therefore, the data must be interpreted with caution. IMPLICATIONS FOR PHYSIOTHERAPY PRACTICE: WHODAS 2.0 can be used as a disability assessment strategy from a biopsychosocial perspective in this population.

Translation, transcultural adaptation, and validation of the Brazilian Portuguese version of the Obstructive Sleep Apnea Knowledge and Attitudes (OSAKA) questionnaire.

PURPOSE: To analyse the psychometric properties of the translated and cross-culturally adapted version of the OSAKA (Obstructive Sleep Apnea Knowledge and Attitudes) questionnaire in the Brazilian Portuguese language. METHODS: The OSAKA instrument was translated by two independent translators, and the back-translated conciliated version was presented and approved by Washington University, which holds the intellectual property for the OSAKA questionnaire. Physicians from different specialties electronically completed the OSAKA instrument and the ASKME (Assessment of Sleep Knowledge in Medical Education) questionnaire, which was used as an auxiliary instrument to analyse the construct validity. RESULTS: The questionnaire was tested with 176 physicians. The items from the knowledge and attitudes domains presented acceptable internal consistency values, with McDonald's omega coefficients (Ω) of 0.70 and 0.73, respectively. The OSAKA questionnaire showed a moderate correlation with the ASKME instrument (r = 0.60, p < 0.001) and excellent retest reliability, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.81. There were differences in knowledge between the medical specialties (p < 0.001). Regarding attitudes, most respondents considered obstructive sleep apnoea and its diagnosis to be important and felt confident in identifying it, but the same majority did not feel confident in treating the disease. CONCLUSION: The OSAKA instrument, as a translated and cross-culturally adapted Brazilian Portuguese version, presented psychometric properties with adequate reliability and validity.

Practice recommendations for the role of physiotherapy in the management of sleep disorders: the 2022 Brazilian Sleep Association Guidelines.

This clinical guideline supported by the Brazilian Sleep Association comprises a brief history of the development of Brazilian sleep physiotherapy, outlines the role of the physiotherapist as part of a sleep health team, and describes the clinical guidelines in respect of the management of some sleep disorders by the physiotherapist (including sleep breathing disorders, i.e., obstructive sleep apnea, central sleep apnea, upper airway resistance syndrome, hypoventilation syndromes and overlap syndrome, and pediatric sleep breathing disorders; sleep bruxism; circadian rhythms disturbances; insomnia; and Willis-Ekbom disease/periodic limb movement disorder. This clinical practice guideline reflects the state of the art at the time of publication and will be reviewed and updated as new information becomes available.

Physiotherapy practice for hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the indications for physiotherapy and to evaluate physiotherapy practices in patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU (on mechanical ventilation) or to the ward (spontaneously breathing). METHODS: An online, 50-item survey was completed by physiotherapists who had been treating hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in Brazil. RESULTS: Of the 644 physiotherapists who initiated the survey, 488 (76%) completed it. The main reasons for indications for physiotherapy in both settings reported as "very frequently" and "frequently" both in the ICU and the ward by most respondents were oxygenation improvement (> 95%) and prevention of general complications (> 83%). Physical deconditioning was considered an infrequent indication. When compared with mobilization strategies, the use of respiratory interventions showed great variability in both work settings, and techniques considered effective were underutilized. The most frequently used respiratory techniques in the ICU were positioning (86%), alveolar recruitment (73%), and hard/brief expiratory rib cage compression (46%), whereas those in the ward were active prone positioning (90%), breathing exercises (88%), and directed/assisted cough (75%). The mobilization interventions reported by more than 75% of the respondents were sitting on the edge of the bed, active and resistive range of motion exercises, standing, ambulation, and stepping in place. CONCLUSIONS: The least common reason for indications for physiotherapy was avoidance of deconditioning, whereas oxygenation improvement was the most frequent one. Great variability in respiratory interventions was observed when compared with mobilization therapies, and there is a clear need to standardize respiratory physiotherapy treatment for hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Validation of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) for individuals with COPD.

PURPOSE: COPD fits the profile of disabling health conditions. This study aims to validate the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) in individuals with COPD. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 100 participants with COPD responded to the Brazilian 36-item version of the WHODAS 2.0, as well as the Saint George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and the COPD Assessment Test (CAT). Spirometric data was extracted from medical records. RESULTS: The internal consistency analysis showed coefficients for all WHODAS 2.0 domains with a strong correlation (0.70-0.85) except for Life activities, which had a moderate correlation (coefficient = 0.60). In the construct analysis, the coefficients for the WHODAS and SGRQ domains presented a consistent correlation among them, varying from 0.40 to 0.69. No correlation was evidenced among the WHODAS domains and the spirometric data, highlighting that linear measures fail when associated with the functioning of an individual with COPD. Discriminative analysis revealed a capacity for the WHODAS 2.0 to distinguish among COPD different levels of clinical impact obtained from CAT excluding the Getting along domain. CONCLUSION: The WHODAS 2.0 shows as a valid instrument that can sensibly assess functioning differences related to the clinical impact classification level in subjects with COPD.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONWHODAS 2.0 is a valid tool to assess functioning in subjects with COPD.WHODAS 2.0 is sensitive to functioning differences related to classification level and to clinical impact in individuals with COPD.As a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (PROM), WHODAS 2.0 offers the opportunity to develop clinical patient-centered interventions, improving the health care.As a low-cost, easy-to-use tool, WHODAS can be a useful resource in the process of clinical assessment of patient functioning.

Physiotherapy practice for hospitalized patients with COVID-19 / Prática fisioterapêutica para pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19

ABSTRACT Objective: To identify the indications for physiotherapy and to evaluate physiotherapy practices in patients with COVID-19 admitted to the ICU (on mechanical ventilation) or to the ward (spontaneously breathing). Methods: An online, 50-item survey was completed by physiotherapists who had been treating hospitalized patients with COVID-19 in Brazil. Results: Of the 644 physiotherapists who initiated the survey, 488 (76%) completed it. The main reasons for indications for physiotherapy in both settings reported as "very frequently" and "frequently" both in the ICU and the ward by most respondents were oxygenation improvement (> 95%) and prevention of general complications (> 83%). Physical deconditioning was considered an infrequent indication. When compared with mobilization strategies, the use of respiratory interventions showed great variability in both work settings, and techniques considered effective were underutilized. The most frequently used respiratory techniques in the ICU were positioning (86%), alveolar recruitment (73%), and hard/brief expiratory rib cage compression (46%), whereas those in the ward were active prone positioning (90%), breathing exercises (88%), and directed/assisted cough (75%). The mobilization interventions reported by more than 75% of the respondents were sitting on the edge of the bed, active and resistive range of motion exercises, standing, ambulation, and stepping in place. Conclusions: The least common reason for indications for physiotherapy was avoidance of deconditioning, whereas oxygenation improvement was the most frequent one. Great variability in respiratory interventions was observed when compared with mobilization therapies, and there is a clear need to standardize respiratory physiotherapy treatment for hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

RESUMO Objetivo: Identificar as indicações de fisioterapia e avaliar as práticas fisioterapêuticas em pacientes com COVID-19 internados na UTI (em ventilação mecânica) ou na enfermaria (em respiração espontânea). Métodos: Questionário online, com 50 questões, respondido por fisioterapeutas que atendiam pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19 no Brasil. Resultados: Dos 644 fisioterapeutas que iniciaram o questionário, 488 (76%) o concluíram. As principais indicações de fisioterapia relatadas como "muito frequente" e "frequentemente" tanto na UTI quanto na enfermaria pela maioria dos respondentes foram melhora da oxigenação (> 95%) e prevenção de complicações gerais (> 83%). Descondicionamento físico foi considerado uma indicação pouco frequente. Em comparação com as estratégias de mobilização, as intervenções respiratórias apresentaram grande variabilidade em ambos os setores de trabalho, e técnicas consideradas eficazes foram subutilizadas. As técnicas respiratórias mais utilizadas na UTI foram posicionamento (86%), recrutamento alveolar (73%) e compressão torácica expiratória forte e rápida (46%), enquanto, na enfermaria, as mais utilizadas foram posição prona ativa (90%), exercícios respiratórios (88%) e tosse assistida/dirigida (75%). As intervenções de mobilização relatadas por mais de 75% dos respondentes foram sedestação a beira leito, exercícios ativos e resistidos de membros superiores/inferiores, ortostatismo, deambulação e marcha estacionária. Conclusões: A indicação menos frequente de fisioterapia foi prevenção do descondicionamento, enquanto melhora da oxigenação foi a mais frequente. Observou-se grande variabilidade nas intervenções respiratórias em comparação com as terapias de mobilização, e há uma clara necessidade de padronização do tratamento fisioterapêutico respiratório para pacientes hospitalizados com COVID-19.

Functioning in the fibromyalgia syndrome: validity and reliability of the WHODAS 2.0.

BACKGROUND: Fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) is both a challenging and disabling condition. The International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) classifies FMS as chronic primary pain, and it can negatively impact individuals' functioning including social, psychological, physical and work-related factors. Notably, while guidelines recommend a biopsychosocial approach for managing chronic pain conditions, FMS assessment remains clinical. The WHODAS 2.0 is a unified scale to measure disability in the light of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Brazilian version of WHODAS 2.0 for use in individuals with FMS. METHODS: Methodological study of the validity and reliability of the Brazilian version of the 36-item WHODAS 2.0 with 110 individuals with FMS. The instrument gives a score from 0 to 100, the higher the value, the worse the level of functioning. We assessed participants with Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) (0-100), Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) (0-10) and Beck Depression Inventory instrument (BDI) (0-63). The construct validity, internal consistency, and test-retest stability. We used SF-36, FIQ and BDI to study construct validity analysis. For statistical analysis, we performed the intraclass correlation (ICC), Spearman correlation, and Cronbach's alpha, with a statistical level of 5%. RESULTS: Most participants were female (92.27%), aged 45 (± 15) years. The test-retest reliability analysis (n = 50) showed stability of the instrument (ICC = 0.54; ρ = 0.84, p < 0.05). The test-retest correlation between the domains was moderate to strong (ρ > 0.58 and < 0.90). Internal consistency was satisfactory for total WHODAS 2.0 (0.91) and also for domains, ranging from 0.44 to 0.81. The construct validity showed satisfactory values with all moderately correlated with WHODAS 2.0 instruments (> 0.46 and < 0.64; p < 0.05). WHODAS 2.0 evaluates the functioning encompassing components of health-related quality of life, functional impact, and depressive symptoms in those with FMS. CONCLUSIONS: WHODAS 2.0 is a reliable and valid instrument to evaluate functioning of Brazilians with FMS. It provides reliable information on individuals' health through of a multidimensional perspective, that allows for individual-centered care.

Perfil sociodemográfico e qualidade de vida de mulheres com doenças cardiovasculares e respiratórias: estudo de base populacional / Perfil sociodemográfico y calidad de vida de mujeres con enfermedades cardiovasculares y respiratorias: estudio poblacional / Demographic profile and quality of life of women with cardiovascular and respiratory diseases: population-based study

RESUMO O objetivo do estudo é descrever o perfil de três grupos de mulheres: aparentemente saudáveis (não doentes-ND); com doenças cardiovasculares (DC); e com doenças respiratórias (DR) crônicas. A pesquisa comparou esses grupos conforme variáveis sociodemográficas (faixa etária, escolaridade, etnia e renda familiar) e dados sobre qualidade de vida (QV), segundo domínios: físico, psicológico, relações sociais e meio ambiente. Este estudo é caracterizado como quantitativo, analítico, observacional e transversal de base populacional, com informações extraídas do Inquérito de Saúde da Mulher, realizado na cidade de Uberaba-MG. Foram entrevistadas 1.387 mulheres, com o objetivo de coletar informações sobre DC, DR, idade, escolaridade, etnia e renda familiar. A QV foi estudada por meio do WHOQOL - Bref, segundo os quatro domínios. Foi realizado levantamento estatístico, descritivo e inferencial. Identificou-se que o grupo com DC é formado por mulheres com idade a partir de 50 anos e baixa escolaridade, em oposição ao grupo de mulheres com DR, que são mais jovens e possuem escolaridade superior. Quanto à QV, as mulheres com DC (31,65%) apresentaram níveis inferiores em relação às mulheres com DR (19,10%), nos domínios: físico (50,6;54,0;<0,0001), psicológico (55,1;58,7;<0,0001), relações sociais (75,8;77,2;0,0055) e meio ambiente (41,7;43,0;0,0173), valores em média. Portanto, o domínio de QV que obteve menor pontuação para todos os grupos foi o meio ambiente e as mulheres com DC apresentaram valores mais baixos, estatisticamente significativos, para todas as categorias.

RESUMEN El objetivo del estudio es describir el perfil de tres grupos de mujeres: aparentemente sanas (no enfermas-NE); con enfermedades cardiovasculares (EC); y con enfermedades respiratorias crónicas (ER). La investigación comparó estos grupos según variables sociodemográficas (grupo de edad, escolaridad, etnia e ingresos familiares) y datos sobre calidad de vida (CV), según dominios: físico, psicológico, relaciones sociales y medio ambiente. Este estudio se caracteriza por ser cuantitativo, analítico, observacional y transversal de base poblacional, con información extraída de la Encuesta de Salud de la Mujer, realizada en la ciudad de Uberaba-MG. Se entrevistó a un total de 1.387 mujeres, con el objetivo de recopilar información sobre EC, ER, edad, escolaridad, etnia e ingresos familiares. La CV se estudió utilizando el WHOQOL - Bref, según los cuatro dominios. Se realizó encuesta estadística, descriptiva e inferencial. Se identificó que el grupo con EC está formado por mujeres con edad de 50 años o más y baja escolaridad, en contraposición al grupo de mujeres con EC, que son más jóvenes y tienen estudios superiores. En cuanto a la CV, las mujeres con EC (31,65%) presentaron niveles más bajos en comparación con las mujeres con ER (19,10%), en los siguientes dominios: físico (50,6; 54,0;<0,001), psicológico (55,1; 58,7;<0,0001), relaciones sociales (75,8;77,2;0,0055) y medio ambiente (41,7;43,0; 0,0173), valores medios. Por lo tanto, el el dominio de CV que obtuvo la puntuación más baja para todos los grupos fue el medio ambiente y las mujeres con EC presentaron valores más bajos, estadísticamente significativos, para todas las categorías.

ABSTRACT This study aims to describe the profile of three groups of women; apparently healthy (non-sick - NS); with cardiovascular diseases (CD); and with chronic respiratory diseases (RD). These groups were compared according to sociodemographic variables (age group, education, ethnicity, and family income) and quality of life (QoL) data, composing the domains: physical, psychological, social relations, and environment. This study is characterized as quantitative, analytical, observational, and cross-sectional population-based, with information extracted from the Women's Health Survey, conducted in the city of Uberaba-MG. A total of 1,387 women were interviewed, and information on CD, RD, age, education, ethnicity and family income were collected. The QoL was studied using WHOQOL - BREF, according to its four domains. Descriptive and inferential statistics were performed. The CD group is composed of women aged 50 years and older and low education level, in contrast to the women of the RD group , who are younger and have higher education level. As for QoL, women with CD (31.65%) had lower levels than women with RD (19.10%), in the domains: physical (50.6;54.0;<0.0001), psychological (55.1;58.7;<0.0001), social relations (75.8;77.2;0.0055), and environment (41.7;43.0;0.0173), values on average and p, respectively. Therefore, the QoL domain that obtained the lowest score for all groups was the environment and women with CD presented lower values for all categories, which were statistically significant.

Validação da versão brasileira do World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 em idosos institucionalizados / Validación de la versión brasileña del World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 en ancianos institucionalizados / Validation of the Brazilian version of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 for institutionalized older adults

RESUMO Fatores associados à institucionalização de idosos podem comprometer a funcionalidade desta população. São escassos os instrumentos que avaliam esse componente conforme o modelo biopsicossocial. Com vistas a medir a funcionalidade e a incapacidade, a Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS) desenvolveu o World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) amparada no modelo teórico-conceitual da Classificação Internacional de Funcionalidade, Incapacidade e Saúde (CIF). O objetivo deste estudo foi verificar as propriedades de medida (confiabilidade, consistência interna e validade de critério) da versão brasileira do WHODAS 2.0 em idosos institucionalizados com diferentes condições de saúde. Cem idosos participaram do estudo. A consistência interna foi avaliada pelo alfa de Cronbach. O coeficiente de Spearman foi utilizado para analisar a confiabilidade teste-reteste, com a reaplicação do questionário WHODAS após sete dias da primeira entrevista. A validade de critério (convergente e divergente) foi analisada pelo coeficiente de Spearman através da correlação dos domínios do WHODAS com os domínios do WHOQoL-bref e WHOQoL-old, que avaliam qualidade de vida. Como resultado, obtivemos consistência interna adequada para todos os domínios (alfa de Cronbach ≥0,75) e forte confiabilidade de teste-reteste (r>0,85). Na validade de critério, obtivemos apenas correlações moderadas com o WHOQoL-bref e WHOQoL-old (r=-0,62; r=-0,61 respectivamente). Esses resultados mostraram que o WHODAS 2.0 é um instrumento válido e confiável como ferramenta de avaliação da funcionalidadepara idosos institucionalizados ao seguir os mesmos conceitos e princípios propostos pela OMS.

RESUMEN Los factores asociados a la institucionalización de los ancianos pueden afectar la funcionalidad de esta población. Existen pocos instrumentos que evalúan este componente según el modelo biopsicosocial. Para medir la funcionalidad y la discapacidad, la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) desarrolló el World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) con base en el modelo teórico-conceptual de la Clasificación Internacional del Funcionamiento, de la Discapacidad y de la Salud (CIF). El objetivo de este estudio fue verificar las propiedades de medición (fiabilidad, consistencia interna y validez de criterio) de la versión brasileña de WHODAS 2.0 en ancianos institucionalizados con diferentes condiciones de salud. En el estudio participaron cien ancianos. La consistencia interna se evaluó mediante el alfa de Cronbach. Se utilizó el coeficiente de Spearman para analizar la fiabilidad test-retest, con la reaplicación del cuestionario WHODAS siete días después de la primera entrevista. Para evaluar la validez de criterio (convergente y divergente), se utilizó el coeficiente de Spearman mediante la correlación de los dominios WHODAS con los dominios de WHOQoL-bref y WHOQoL-old, que evalúan la calidad de vida. Como resultado, hubo una consistencia interna adecuada para todos los dominios (alfa de Cronbach≥0,75) y una gran fiabilidad test-retest (r>0,85). En la validez de criterio, hubo solo correlaciones moderadas con WHOQoL-bref y WHOQoL-old (r=-0,62; r=-0,61, respectivamente). Estos resultados apuntan que WHODAS 2.0 es un instrumento válido y fiable en la evaluación de ancianos institucionalizados siguiendo los mismos conceptos y principios propuestos por la OMS.

Abstract Factors associated with the institutionalization of older adults may interfere with the Functioning of this population. There are few instruments that evaluate this component according to the biopsychosocial model. The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) is an instrument developed by WHO (World Health Organization) to measure functioning and disability supported by the theoretical-conceptual model of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). This study aims to verify the reliability, internal consistency (IC) and criterion validity of the Brazilian version of the WHODAS 2.0 when applied to institutionalized older adults with different health conditions. In total, 100 older adults participated in the study. IC was assessed by Cronbach's alpha. Spearman's coefficient was used to analyze test-retest reliability, with the WHODAS questionnaire being reapplied seven days after the first interview. Criterion validity (convergent and divergent) was also analyzed by Spearman's coefficient by the correlation analysis with the WHOQOL-BREF and the WHOQOL-OLD. As a result, we obtained an IC that was adequate for all domains (Cronbach's alpha ≥0.75), with strong test-retest reliability (r> 0.85). In the criterion validity, we obtained only moderate correlations of the WHODAS 2.0 domains with the WHOQOL-BREF and WHOQOL-OLD domains (r=−0.62; r=−0.61 respectively). The psychometric properties tested indicated reliability - good internal consistency and strong test-retest reliability - and qualifications correlations in the criterion value. These results demonstrated that WHODAS 2.0 is a valid and reliable instrument, thus providing an assessment tool for institutionalized older adults following the concepts and principles proposed by WHO for assessing functioning.

Are the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) domains considered in the obstructive sleep apnea instruments? An integrative review.

PURPOSE: Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) is related to cardiovascular, metabolic, and neurocognitive diseases. Furthermore, OSA symptoms, such as excessive sleepiness, fatigue, and mood disorders, may interfere in functioning. The assessment of this aspect in patients with OSA is not frequent and no specific instrument is available in the literature. Our aim is to identify if the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) domains are considered in the validated instruments used to assess patients with OSA. METHODS: In this integrative literature review, three databases were searched: Pubmed, Embase, and LILACS. Bibliographic survey was carried out in 2020, between March and July. Articles published in English, Portuguese, and Spanish with validated tools to assess OSA in adults were included. RESULTS: Thirty instruments have undergone a process of concept extraction and coding according to the ICF, generating a total of 769 significant concepts. It was observed that the function domain was the most prevalent, making 42% (n = 323) of the concepts, followed by domains of activity (16%), participation (10%), environmental factors (5%), personal factor (5%), and structure (1%). Only one instrument, the "Sleep Apnea Quality of Life Index (SAQLI)," encompasses all domains of the ICF in its constructs. CONCLUSION: In the analyzed instruments, the function domain prevails, with most concepts related to sleep functions. Only one validated instrument included in this research covered all the ICF domains. This instrument closely matched the recommended way of assessing functioning, though it approached the domains in an unbalanced way.

Functioning in the fibromyalgia syndrome: validity and reliability of the WHODAS 2.0

Abstract Background: Fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) is both a challenging and disabling condition. The International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) classifies FMS as chronic primary pain, and it can negatively impact individuals' functioning including social, psychological, physical and work-related factors. Notably, while guidelines recommend a biopsychosocial approach for managing chronic pain conditions, FMS assessment remains clinical. The WHODAS 2.0 is a unified scale to measure disability in the light of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Brazilian version of WHODAS 2.0 for use in individuals with FMS. Methods: Methodological study of the validity and reliability of the Brazilian version of the 36-item WHODAS 2.0 with 110 individuals with FMS. The instrument gives a score from 0 to 100, the higher the value, the worse the level of functioning. We assessed participants with Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) (0-100), Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ) (0-10) and Beck Depression Inventory instrument (BDI) (0-63). The construct validity, internal consistency, and test-retest stability. We used SF-36, FIQ and BDI to study construct validity analysis. For statistical analysis, we performed the intraclass correlation (ICC), Spearman correlation, and Cronbach's alpha, with a statistical level of 5%. Results: Most participants were female (92.27%), aged 45 (± 15) years. The test-retest reliability analysis (n = 50) showed stability of the instrument (ICC = 0.54; ρ = 0.84, p < 0.05). The test-retest correlation between the domains was moderate to strong (ρ > 0.58 and < 0.90). Internal consistency was satisfactory for total WHODAS 2.0 (0.91) and also for domains, ranging from 0.44 to 0.81. The construct validity showed satisfactory values with all moderately correlated with WHODAS 2.0 instruments (> 0.46 and < 0.64; p < 0.05). WHODAS 2.0 evaluates the functioning encompassing components of health-related quality of life, functional impact, and depressive symptoms in those with FMS. Conclusions: WHODAS 2.0 is a reliable and valid instrument to evaluate functioning of Brazilians with FMS. It provides reliable information on individuals' health through of a multidimensional perspective, that allows for individual-centered care.

Can morphological features evaluated in oral cancer biopsies influence in decision-making? A preliminary study.

Tumor budding (TB) is a promising prognostic marker in many cancers including oral squamous cell carcinoma. The evaluation of TB in preoperative diagnostic biopsies has been proven be possible; therefore, the association of TB with other morphological features can represent an important aid in the previous treatment decision. This study aims to evaluate TB in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) biopsies, assessing its association with other morphological characteristics of the sample. A total of 56 cases of OSCC were investigated. In hematoxylin and eosin-stained slides, morphological features including histopathological grading and mode of invasion were evaluated in the deep invasive front. Moreover, immunohistochemistry was performed with anti-multi-cytokeratin antibody helping in the identification of TB, which was graded as low-intensity or no TB and high-intensity TB. Descriptive and bivariate analyses were performed, and the level of significance was set at 5%. The tongue was the most-affected site with 29 (51.7 %) tumors. The predominant mode of invasion (27-48.2 %) was by groups of neoplastic cells without clear boundaries. Of the cases investigated, 37 (66.1 %) were high-intensity TB, which was associated with the mode of invasion of the tumors (p < 0.05). All cases with the worst mode of invasion showed high-intensity TB. Preliminary results showed the potential of morphological features, such as TB and mode of invasion, evaluated in diagnostic specimens of OSCC, aiding in the treatment decision to select patients who could benefit from more-aggressive treatments.

Validation of the Brazilian version of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 for individuals with HIV/AIDS. / Validação da versão brasileira do World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 em indivíduos HIV/AIDS.

The WHODAS 2.0 (World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule) is an instrument developed by the WHO (World Health Organization) for functioning and disability assessment based on the biopsychosocial framework, fully supported by the theoretical-conceptual framework of the ICF (International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health). To validate the Brazilian version of the WHODAS 2.0 for individuals with HIV/AIDS. 100 individuals with diagnosis of HIV/AIDS participated in the study. Two assessment instruments were used: the 36-item version of WHODAS 2.0 and the WHOQOL-HIV-BREF (World Health Organization Quality of Life assessment in persons infected with HIV, shorter version). The psychometric properties tested were internal consistency and criterion validity. Internal consistency was adequate for all domains, with the exception of Life Activities (α = 0.69) and Self-care (α = 0.32). Criterion validity was adequate, with moderate correlations between the WHODAS 2.0 and the WHOQOL-HIV-BREF domains. The results indicated the WHODAS 2.0 instrument as a valid tool for assessing functioning of individuals with HIV/AIDS. The use of data from the Self-care domain should be carefully considered.

O WHODAS 2.0 (World Health Organization Disability Assesment Schedule) é um instrumento criado pela OMS (Organização Mundial da Saúde) para medida de funcionalidade e deficiência, fundamentado no modelo biopsicossocial e totalmente amparado no arcabouço teórico-conceitual da CIF (Classificação Internacional de Funcionalidade, Incapacidade e Saúde). O objetivo deste artigo é validar a versão brasileira do WHODAS 2.0 para o uso em pessoas com HIV/AIDS. Participaram 100 pessoas com diagnóstico de HIV/AIDS. Foram utilizados dois instrumentos de avaliação, o WHODAS 2.0 na versão de 36 itens e o WHOQoL-HIV-Bref (World Health Organization Quality of Life em pessoas com HIV, versão abreviada). As propriedades psicométricas testadas foram consistência interna e validade de critério. A consistência interna foi adequada para todos os domínios, com exceção do domínio Atividades de Vida (α = 0,69) e Autocuidado (α = 0,32). A validade de critério foi adequada, com correlações moderadas aos domínios do WHODAS 2.0 com os domínios do WHOQoL-HIV-Abreviado. Os resultados indicaram o instrumento WHODAS 2.0 como válido para avaliação da funcionalidade de pessoas com HIV/AIDS. O uso dos dados do domínio de Autocuidado deve ser cuidadosamente considerado.

Validação da versão brasileira do World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2. 0 em indivíduos HIV/AIDS / Validation of the Brazilian version of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2. 0 for individuals with HIV/AIDS

Resumo O WHODAS 2.0 (World Health Organization Disability Assesment Schedule) é um instrumento criado pela OMS (Organização Mundial da Saúde) para medida de funcionalidade e deficiência, fundamentado no modelo biopsicossocial e totalmente amparado no arcabouço teórico-conceitual da CIF (Classificação Internacional de Funcionalidade, Incapacidade e Saúde). O objetivo deste artigo é validar a versão brasileira do WHODAS 2.0 para o uso em pessoas com HIV/AIDS. Participaram 100 pessoas com diagnóstico de HIV/AIDS. Foram utilizados dois instrumentos de avaliação, o WHODAS 2.0 na versão de 36 itens e o WHOQoL-HIV-Bref (World Health Organization Quality of Life em pessoas com HIV, versão abreviada). As propriedades psicométricas testadas foram consistência interna e validade de critério. A consistência interna foi adequada para todos os domínios, com exceção do domínio Atividades de Vida (α = 0,69) e Autocuidado (α = 0,32). A validade de critério foi adequada, com correlações moderadas aos domínios do WHODAS 2.0 com os domínios do WHOQoL-HIV-Abreviado. Os resultados indicaram o instrumento WHODAS 2.0 como válido para avaliação da funcionalidade de pessoas com HIV/AIDS. O uso dos dados do domínio de Autocuidado deve ser cuidadosamente considerado.

Abstract The WHODAS 2.0 (World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule) is an instrument developed by the WHO (World Health Organization) for functioning and disability assessment based on the biopsychosocial framework, fully supported by the theoretical-conceptual framework of the ICF (International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health). To validate the Brazilian version of the WHODAS 2.0 for individuals with HIV/AIDS. 100 individuals with diagnosis of HIV/AIDS participated in the study. Two assessment instruments were used: the 36-item version of WHODAS 2.0 and the WHOQOL-HIV-BREF (World Health Organization Quality of Life assessment in persons infected with HIV, shorter version). The psychometric properties tested were internal consistency and criterion validity. Internal consistency was adequate for all domains, with the exception of Life Activities (α = 0.69) and Self-care (α = 0.32). Criterion validity was adequate, with moderate correlations between the WHODAS 2.0 and the WHOQOL-HIV-BREF domains. The results indicated the WHODAS 2.0 instrument as a valid tool for assessing functioning of individuals with HIV/AIDS. The use of data from the Self-care domain should be carefully considered.

Validation of the Brazilian version of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule in individuals with diabetes mellitus / Validação da versão brasileira do World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule em indivíduos com diabetes mellitus / Validación de la versión brasileña del World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule en personas con diabetes mellitus

ABSTRACT To evaluate the functioning of individuals with diabetes mellitus (DM) using a biopsychosocial model, recommended by the World Health Organization and sustained in the theoretical-conceptual framework of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), this study proposed validating the Brazilian version of WHODAS 2.0 (World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule). The 36-item version of WHODAS 2.0 was applied to 100 participants with DM as validation procedures, using the measurement of Diabetes Quality of Life Measure (DQOL-Brazil) and a dynamometry. The psychometric properties analyzed were internal consistency (Cronbach Alpha coefficient) and convergent and divergent external validity (Spearman correlation coefficient). The internal consistency analysis was appropriate, except for the "having a good relationship with people" domain in the alpha Cronbach coefficient. External validity analysis confirmed the convergence hypothesis between the correlate domains of the different tools. The exception was the "life activities" domain (WHODAS) with the left-hand dynamometry. The Brazilian version of the WHODAS 2.0 instrument is a valid instrument to assess the functioning of these individuals.

RESUMO Visando avaliar a funcionalidade dos sujeitos com diabetes mellitus (DM) usando um modelo biopsicossocial, recomendado pela Organização Mundial de Saúde, e ancorado no arcabouço teórico-conceitual da Classificação Internacional de Funcionalidade, Incapacidade e Saúde, este estudo propôs a validação da versão brasileira do WHODAS 2.0 (World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule). A versão de 36 itens do WHODAS 2.0 foi aplicada a 100 sujeitos com DM. Como instrumentos auxiliares à validação, utilizou-se o instrumento Diabetes Quality of Life Measure (DQOL-Brasil) e a dinamometria. As propriedades psicométricas analisadas foram consistência interna (coeficiente Alfa de Cronbach) e validade externa - convergente e divergente (coeficiente de correlação de Spearman). A análise de consistência interna mostrou-se apropriada, à exceção do domínio "relações interpessoais". A análise da validade externa confirmou as hipóteses de convergência esperadas na comparação dos domínios correlatos dos instrumentos auxiliares utilizados no processo de validação, exceto no domínio "atividades de vida" (WHODAS) com a dinamometria da mão esquerda. Conclui-se que a versão brasileira do instrumento WHODAS 2.0 é válida para aferição da funcionalidade nesses indivíduos.

RESUMEN Para evaluar las limitaciones funcionales de las personas con diabetes mellitus (DM) utilizando un modelo biopsicosocial, recomendado por la Organización Mundial de la Salud y anclado en el marco teórico-conceptual de la Clasificación Internacional del Funcionamiento, de la Discapacidad y de la Salud, este estudio propuso validar la versión brasileña de WHODAS 2.0 (World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule). La versión de 36 ítems de WHODAS 2.0 se aplicó a 100 participantes con DM. Como procedimientos auxiliares de validación, se utilizaron la Diabetes Quality of Life Measure (DQOL-Brasil) y la dinamometría. Las propiedades psicométricas analizadas fueron la consistencia interna (coeficiente alfa de Cronbach) y la validez externa convergente y divergente (coeficiente de correlación de Spearman). El análisis de la consistencia interna fue apropiado, excepto en el dominio "llevarse bien con las personas" en el coeficiente alfa de Cronbach. El análisis de validez externa confirmó la hipótesis de convergencia entre los dominios correlacionados de las diferentes herramientas. La excepción fue el dominio "actividades de la vida" (WHODAS) con la dinamometría izquierda. Se concluye que la versión brasileña del WHODAS 2.0 es un instrumento válido para evaluar el funcionamiento de estos individuos.

The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2 (WHODAS 2.0): remarks on the need to revise the WHODAS.

Functioning and disability are concepts in increasing use in clinical settings and in public health. From the public health perspective, the use of functioning as a third health indicator could show more than the frequency of a disease and its death rates, offering information on how the population performs its activities and participation. Clinically, the functioning assessment can provide information for patient-centered health care and specific clinical interventions according to their functioning profile. WHODAS 2.0 is a generic tool to assess health and functioning according to the ICF functioning model. It is an alternative to assess functioning in a less time-consuming way, whereas the duration of the application is one of the main ICF critiques. This paper aims to present some of WHODAS 2.0 inconsistencies and weaknesses as well as strategies to cope with them. In this paper, we present some weaknesses related to the WHODAS layout; wording and scoring process. Some suggestions for strategies to correct these weaknesses are presented, as well.

Validade e confiabilidade da versão brasileira do World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule em pessoas com cegueira / Validez y confiabilidad de la versión brasileña de la World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule en personas con ceguera / Validity and reliability of the Brazilian version of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule in blind people

RESUMO O World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) é uma ferramenta desenvolvida pela Organização Mundial de Saúde (OMS) para medir deficiência e incapacidade, apoiando o modelo da Classificação Internacional de Saúde, Incapacidade e Funcionalidade. A versão brasileira do WHODAS 2.0 foi traduzida e disponibilizada para uso pela OMS em 2015. Assim, este estudo pretende validar a versão brasileira do WHODAS 2.0 para uso em pessoas com cegueira. Participaram 56 pessoas com cegueira (idade média: 48,4±13,6 anos). Foram utilizadas duas ferramentas de avaliação: a versão de 36 itens do WHODAS 2.0 e o World Health Organization Quality of Life-bref (WHOQOL-abreviado). As propriedades psicométricas testadas foram consistência interna, teste-reteste e validade de critério. Houve boa confiabilidade teste-reteste (ICC≥0,63). Os valores de a de Cronbach mostraram boa consistência interna na maioria das áreas, exceto no subdomínio de atividades escolares ou de trabalho (a=0,55). A validade do critério foi adequada, com correlações moderadas entre os domínios do WHODAS 2.0 e áreas do WHOQOL-abreviado. Os resultados indicaram a validade do WHODAS 2.0 para avaliar a funcionalidade de pessoas com cegueira.

RESUMEN La World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) es una herramienta desarrollada por la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS), la que se utiliza para medir la discapacidad y la incapacidad, basándose en el modelo de la Clasificación Internacional del Funcionamiento de la Discapacidad y de la Salud. La versión brasileña de WHODAS 2.0 fue traducida por la OMS y puesta a disposición para su uso en 2015. Este estudio pretende validar la versión brasileña de WHODAS 2.0 para uso en personas con ceguera. Participaron 56 personas con ceguera (promedio de edad: 48,4±13,6 años). Se utilizaron dos herramientas de evaluación: la versión de 36 ítems de WHODAS 2.0 y la World Health Organization Quality of Life-bref (WHOQOL-abreviado). Las propiedades psicométricas probadas fueron: consistencia interna, test-retest y validez de criterio. Hubo una buena confiabilidad test-retest (ICC≥0,63). Los valores de a de Cronbach mostraron una buena consistencia interna en la mayoría de las áreas, excepto en el subdominio de actividades escolares o de trabajo (a=0,55). La validez del criterio fue adecuada, con correlaciones moderadas entre los dominios de WHODAS 2.0 y las áreas de WHOQOL-bref. Los resultados demuestran la validez de WHODAS 2.0 para evaluar la funcionalidad de las personas con ceguera.

ABSTRACT The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) is a tool developed by the World Health Organization (WHO) to measure functioning and disability, supporting the ICF model. The Brazilian version of WHODAS 2.0 was translated and made available for use by WHO in 2015. Thus, this study aims to validate the Brazilian version of WHODAS 2.0 for use in blind people. Participants were 56 blind people (mean age: 48.4 ± 13.6) years. Two assessment tools were used, the 36-item version of WHODAS 2.0 and the World Health Organization Quality of Life-BREF (WHOQOL-bref). The psychometric properties tested were internal consistency, test-retest and criterion validity. There was good test-retest reliability (ICC≥0.63). Cronbach's alpha values showed good internal consistency in most areas, except in the subdomain of school or work activities (α = 0.55). The validity criterion was adequate, with moderate correlations between WHODAS 2.0 domains and WHOQOL-bref areas. The results indicated the validity of the WHODAS 2.0 for assessing the functionality of blind people.