This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 0269215509341524v1 23/10/909    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Post, M. W. Articles by Berdenis van Berlekom, S. H PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Post, M. W. Articles by Berdenis van Berlekom, S. H Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Development and validation of the Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Clinical Rehabilitation (USER)

Centre of Excellence in Rehabilitation Medicine, De Hoogstraat, Utrecht, m.post{at}dehoogstraat.nl

Ingrid GL van de Port

Rehabilitation Center De Hoogstraat and Rudolf Magnus Institute for Neuroscience, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands

Bert Kap

Rehabilitation Center De Hoogstraat and Rudolf Magnus Institute for Neuroscience, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands

Steven H Berdenis van Berlekom

Rehabilitation Center De Hoogstraat and Rudolf Magnus Institute for Neuroscience, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands

Objective: The Utrecht Scale for Evaluation of Rehabilitation (USER) is a measure of functional independence that covers physical functioning (mobility, self-care), cognitive functioning and additional domains of pain, fatigue and mood. USER is implemented in the Netherlands as a generic rehabilitation outcome measure. This article reports the development and psychometric characteristics of USER.

Design: (1) Inter-rater reliability study and (2) responsiveness study with measurements at admission and at discharge from clinical rehabilitation.

Setting: Three rehabilitation facilities in the Netherlands.

Patients: Rehabilitation inpatients (N = 319).

Interventions: Not applicable.

Main outcome measures: Effect size (ES) and standardized response mean (SRM) of USER scales were compared to those of the Barthel Index, Functional Independence Measure (FIM) and to relevant scales of the SF-36.

Results: Inter-rater reliability of USER was satisfactory to good. Strong correlations were found between the physical and cognitive functioning scores of USER, the Barthel Index and FIM (0.84—0.94). Correlations between USER pain, fatigue and mood scores and SF-36 scores were also strong (0.58—0.84). Responsiveness of USER physical functioning (1.0—1.2) was very good and slightly better than responsiveness of the Barthel Index (0.9—1.1) and the FIM motor score (0.8—1.1). Responsiveness of the USER cognitive score was below standard (0.2—0.3), but better than responsiveness of the FIM cognitive scores (0.1—0.2).

Conclusions: USER is a reliable, valid and responsive measure of functional independence that can be used as an alternative for the FIM. The pain, fatigue and mood scores were adapted after this study and need additional validation.

This version was published on October 1, 2009

Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 23, No. 10, 909-917 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0269215509341524


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. Wade Generic or global outcome measures in rehabilitation: are they appropriate for measuring (and improving) service quality? Clinical Rehabilitation, October 1, 2009; 23(10): 867 - 872. [PDF]