Key elements of the Government's community care policy are the assessment of disabled people's needs and the measurement of the outcome of any services provided. This article describes the development of a standardised assessment which could be used by community occupational therapists both to assess the level of need and to measure outcome in relation to occupational therapy.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
MandelstamM. How to get equipment for disability. London: Jessica Kingsley, 1990.
2.
EakinP. Disability and community care: The development of an instrument to assess need and measure outcome. PhD thesis. Jordanstown: University of Ulster, 1993.
3.
Caring for people: Community care in the next decade and beyond. London: HMSO, 1989.
4.
Department of Health Social Services Inspectorate and Scottish Office Social Work Services Group. Care management and assessment: Managers' guide. London: HMSO, 1991: 44.
5.
EakinP. Assessments of activities of daily living: A critical review. Br J Occup Ther1989; 52(1): 11–15.
6.
EakinP. Problems with assessments of activities of daily living. Br J Occup Ther1989; 52(2): 50–54.
7.
NicolsPJR. Are ADL indices of any value?Br J Occup Ther1976; 39(6): 160–63.
8.
KeithRA. Functional assessment measures in medical rehabilitation: Current status. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1984: 65(2): 74–78.
9.
DumbovyMLSandokBABasfordJR. Rehabilitation for stroke: A review. Stroke1986; 17(3): 363–69.
10.
GrangerCVAlbrechtGLHamiltonBB. Outcome of comprehensive medical rehabilitation; measurement by Pulses profile and Barthel index. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1979; 60: 145–54.
11.
AndrewsKBrocklehurstJCRichardsBLaycockPJ. The rate of recovery from stroke and its measurement. Int Rehabil Med1981; 3: 155–61.
12.
AndrewsKStewartJ. Stroke recovery: He can but does he?Rheumatol Rehabil1979; 18: 43–48.
13.
GarrawayWMAkhtarAJHockeyLPrescottRJ. Management of acute stroke in the elderly: Follow up of a controlled trial. Br Med J1980; 281: 827–29.
14.
World Health Organisation. International classification of impairments, disabilities and handicaps. Geneva: WHO, 1980: 28.
15.
Department of Health Social Services Inspectorate and Scottish Office Social Work Services Group. Care management and assessment: Practitioners' guide. London: HMSO, 1991.
16.
MahoneyFIBarthelDW. Functional evaluation: The Barthel index. Md State Med J1965; 14: 61–65.
17.
DonaldsonSWWagnerCCGreshamGE. A unified ADL evaluation form. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1973; 54: 175–79.
18.
GreshamGEPhillipsTFLabiMLC. ADL status in stroke: Relative merits of three standard indices. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1980; 61: 355–58.
19.
GrangerCVGreshamGE. Functional assessment in rehabilitation medicine. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1984.
20.
WadeDTSkilbeckCEHewerR. LangtonPredicting Barthel ADL score at 6 months after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1983; 64: 24–28.
21.
GrangerCVDewisLFPetersNCSherwoodCCBarrettJE. Stroke rehabilitation: Analysis of repeated Barthel index measures. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1979; 60: 14–17.
22.
WadeDTHewerR LangtonSkilbeckCEDavidRM. Stroke: A critical approach to diagnosis, treatment and management. London: Chapman and Hall, 1985.
23.
WadeDTCollinC. The Barthel index: A standard measure of physical disability?Int Disabil Stud1988; 10: 64–67.
24.
CollinCWadeDTDaviesSHomeV. The Barthel index: A reliability study. Int Disabil Stud1988; 10: 61–63.
25.
RoyCWTogneriJHayEPentlandB. An inter-rater reliability study of the Barthel index. Int J Rehabil Res1988; 11: 67–70.
26.
McGinnisGESewardMLDeJongGOsbergJS. Programme evaluation of physical medicine and rehabilitation departments using self-report Barthel. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1986; 67: 123–25.
27.
RothEDavidoffGHaughtonJArdnerM. Functional assessment in spinal cord injury: A comparison of the modified Barthel index and the ‘adapted’ functional independence measure. Clin Rehabil1990; 4: 277–85.
28.
ShahSVanclayFCooperB. Improving the sensitivity of the Barthel index for stroke rehabilitation. J Clin Epidemiol1989; 42: 703–709.
29.
McDowellINewellC. Measuring health: A guide to rating scales and questionnaires. New York: Oxford University Press, 1987.
30.
HarrisACoxBSmithC. Handicapped and impaired in Great Britain (OPCS Report, Part 1). London: HMSO, 1971.
31.
Department of Health and Social Services, Northern Ireland Office. Housing for physically handicapped persons. Circular Letter HSS (OS5A) 2/76. Belfast: DHSS, 1976.
32.
StreinerDINormanGR. Health measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use. New York: Oxford University Press, 1989.
33.
HasselkusBR. Barthel self-care index and geriatric home care patients. Phys Occup Ther Geriatr1982; 1: 11–22.
