Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: Crit Care Med. 2016 Jul;44(7):1267–1277. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001651

Table 5. Assessments of Participation Restriction.

1970 - 2013 1970 - 1999 2000 - 2013
(N = 196) (N = 65) (N = 131)
Assessment
Papers using >1 instrument to assess participation restriction 77 (39%) 28 (43%) 49 (37%)
Article to instrument ratio* 2.8 1.5 3.4
Assessment of baseline (pre-hospitalization) participation restriction†† 84 (43%) 35 (54%) 49 (37%)
 Baseline assessment obtained via:
  Patient interview 79 (40%) 31 (48%) 48 (37%)
  Proxy interview 42 (21%) 17 (26%) 25 (19%)
  Chart review 10 (5%) 4 (6%) 6 (5%)
  Not reported or unclear 18 (9%) 3 (5%) 15 (12%)
Instruments used to assess participation restriction
 Return to work 87 (44%) 31 (48%) 56 (53%)
 Katz Activities of Daily Living (ADL) 41 (21%) 10 (15%) 31 (24%)
 Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) 16 (8%) 4 (6%) 12 (9%)
 Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) 15 (8%) 1 (2%) 14 (11%)
 Karnofsky Performance Status Scale 11 (6%) 4 (6%) 7 (5%)
 Barthel Index (BI) 11 (6%) 1 (2%) 10 (8%)
 Functional Independence Measure (FIM)TIM 6 (3%) 1 (2%) 5 (4%)
 New York Heart Association (NYHA) Functional Classification 5 (3%) 2 (3%) 3 (2%)
 Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) Scale 5 (3%) 0 (0%) 5 (4%)
 Modified Rankin Scale (MRS) 3 (2%) 0 (0%) 3 (2%)
 Other Named Instruments 32 (16%) 11 (17%) 21 (16%)
 Custom-made Instrument 28 (14%) 23 (35%) 5 (4%)
*

The article to instrument ratio is the quotient of the number of articles to the number of unique measurement instruments. A higher ratio indicates greater consolidation around a core set of measures.

Excludes return to work, all but 2 papers used the same instrument used during follow-up

Represents instruments used in <3 eligible articles