Validating the Potential of the International Classification of Functioning,Disability and Health to Identify Barriers to and Facilitators of Consumer Participation
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online June, 2007
Validating the Potential of the International Classification of Functioning,Disability and Health to Identify Barriers to and Facilitators of Consumer Participation
Background. Occupational therapists need tools to identify barriers and facilitators to participation in societal roles. Purpose. The purpose of this study was to examine the potential of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) two-level classification for use in occupational therapy. Methods. A secondary analysis of an existing dataset was conducted to identify participation barriers and facilitators that mapped to the ICF and those that did not. Results. A broad range of factors was captured across the components of the ICF. Findings also revealed enabling and disabling factors that were not evident in the ICF. Practice Implications. The ICF can support the identification of a broad range of external barriers and facilitators relevant to participation and of interest to occupational therapy. However, therapists must use other strategies to gain a comprehensive understanding of the nature, extent and consequences of barriers and facilitators that may exist in a given context.
BrintnellS. (2002). WHO — International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health — Development and Canadian Content. WFOT Bulletin, 45, 33–37.
2.
BruyèreS. M. (2005). Using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) to promote employment and community integration in rehabilitation. Rehabilitation Education, 19, 105–117.
3.
Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists. (1997). Enabling occupation: An occupational therapy perspective.Ottawa, ON: CAOT Publications ACE.
4.
Canadian Association of Occupational Therapists, The Health Services Directorate, & Health Services and Promotion Branch. (1983). Guidelines for the client-centred practice of occupational therapy.Ottawa, ON: Minister of National Health and Welfare.
5.
DagfinrudH.KjekenI.MowinckelP.HagenK. B.KvienT. K. (2005). Impact of functional impairment in Ankylosing Spondylitis: Impairment, activity limitation, and participation restrictions. The Journal of Rheumatology, 32, 516–523.
6.
HammellK.W. (2004). Deviating from the norm: A skeptical interrogation of the classification practices of the ICF. The British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 67, 408–411.
7.
HarwoodR.H.RogersA.DickinsonE.EbrahimS. (1994). Measuring handicap: The London Handicap Scale, a new outcome measure for chronic disease. Quality in Health Care, 3, 11–16.
8.
HemmingssonH.JonssonH. (2005). The issue is-An occupational perspective on the concept of participation in the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health- Some critical remarks. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 59, 659–576.
9.
JetteA.M.HaleyS.M.KooyoomjianJ.T. (2003). Are the ICF activity and participation dimensions distinct?Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 35, 145–149.
10.
KuzelA. J.LikeR.C. (1991). Standards of trustworthiness for qualitative studies in primary care. In NortonP.G.StewartM.TudiverF.BassM.J.DunnE.V. (Eds.), Primary care research: Traditional and innovative approaches (pp. 138–158). Newbury Park, California: Sage.
11.
NoreauL.DesrosiersJ.RobichaudL.FougeyrollasP.RochetteA.ViscogliosiC. (2004). Measuring social participation: Reliability of the LIFE-H in older adults with disabilities. Disability and Rehabilitation, 26, 346–352.
12.
PerenboomR. J. M.ChorusA. M. J. (2003). Measuring participation according to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Disability and Rehabilitation, 25, 577–587.
RebeiroK. (2003). Partnerships for participation in occupation. Mental Health Special Interest Section Quarterly, 25, 1–3.
15.
ShawL.MacKinnonJ. (2004). A multidimensional view of health. Education for Health, 17, 213–222.
16.
ShawL.MacKinnonJ.McWilliamC.SumsionT. (2004). Consumer participation in the work rehabilitation process: Contextual factors and implications for practice. Work, 23, 182–192.
17.
ShawL.McWilliamC.SumsionT.MacKinnonJ. (2007). Optimizing environments for consumer participation and self-direction in finding employment. Occupational Therapy Journal of Research, 27, 1–12.
18.
ShawL.SumsionT.McWilliamC.MacKinnonJ. (2004). Service provider challenges in implementing participatory approaches in employment rehabilitation. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 21, 123–136.
19.
StewartD. (2002). The new ICF: International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Concepts and implementation issues for occupational therapists. OT Now, 4, Available on-line at: http://www.caot.ca/default.asp?ChangeID=408&pageID=453.
20.
StuckiG.EwertT.CiezaA. (2002). Value and application of the ICF in rehabilitation medicine. Disability and Rehabilitation, 24, 932–938.
21.
TateD.ForcheimerM.MaynardF.DijkersM. (1994). Predicting depression and psychological distress in persons with spinal cord injury based on indicators of handicap. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation73, 175–183.
22.
TownsendE. (1998). Good intentions overruled: A critique of empowerment in the routine organization of mental health services.Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.
23.
World Health Organization (2001a). International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health.Geneva, Switzerland: Author.
24.
World Health Organization (2001b). International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Short version. Geneva, Switzerland: Author.
