Patient-report and caregiver-report measures of rehabilitation service use following acquired brain injury: a systematic review
Sophie McCormick,Jessica M Jarvis,Lauren Terhorst,Amanda Richardson,Lauren Kaseman,Aboli Kesbhat,Yamini Yepuri,Elizabeth Beyene,Helena VonVille,Roxanna Bendixen,Amery Treble-Barna,McCormick,S.,Jarvis,J. M.,Terhorst,L.,Richardson,A.,Kaseman,L.,Kesbhat,A.,Yepuri,Y.,Beyene,E.,VonVille,H.,Bendixen,R.,Treble-Barna,A.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-076537
IF: 3.006
2024-02-21
BMJ Open
Abstract:Objective To review patient-report/caregiver-report measures of rehabilitation service use following acquired brain injury (ABI). Data sources Medline, APA PsycINFO, Embase and CINAHL were searched on November 2021 and November 2022. Authors were contacted if measures were not included in manuscripts/appendices. Study selection Included articles were empirical research or a research protocol, available in English and described measures of patient report/caregiver report of rehabilitation service use post-ABI via quantitative or qualitative methods. Two reviewers independently screened 5290 records using DistillerSR. Discrepancies were resolved by team adjudication. Data extraction Data extraction was piloted with high levels of agreement (k=.94). Data were extracted by a single member with team meetings to seek guidance as needed. Data included administration characteristics (reporter, mode of administration, recall period), psychometric evidence and dimensions assessed (types of services, setting, frequency, duration, intensity, qualitative aspects). Data synthesis One hundred and fifty-two measures were identified from 85 quantitative, 56 qualitative and 3 psychometric studies. Psychometric properties were reported for four measures, all of which focused on satisfaction. Most measures inquired about the type of rehabilitation services used, with more than half assessing functional (eg, physical therapy) and behavioural health rehabilitation services, but fewer than half assessing community and academic reintegration (eg, special education, vocational rehabilitation) or cognitive (eg, neuropsychology) services. Fewer than half assessed qualitative aspects (eg, satisfaction). Recall periods ranged from 1 month to 'since the ABI event' or focused on current use. Of measures that could be accessed (n=71), many included a limited checklist of types of services used. Very few measures assessed setting, frequency, intensity or duration. Conclusions Despite widespread interest, the vast majority of measures have not been validated and are limited in scope. Use of gold-standard psychometric methods to develop and validate a comprehensive patient-report/caregiver-report measure of rehabilitation service use would have wide-ranging implications for improving rehabilitation research in ABI.
medicine, general & internal