Validation of the 36-item and 12-item self-report World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II (WHODAS-II) in individuals with autism spectrum disorder

Comparison of the 12-item and 36-item versions of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 using longitudinal data from community mental health outreach service users

AIM

This study aimed to compare the 12-item and 36-item versions of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 using longitudinal data from community mental health outreach service users.

METHODS

Using data from Tokorozawa City mental health outreach service users in Japan, total and domain WHODAS-12 and WHODAS-36 scores were compared. First, we examined score-change differences by domain at the start of outreach services (T1) and 1 year later (T2) for each version. Next, we compared differences between the two versions using Pearson's correlation, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and Bland-Altman analysis.

RESULTS

Among 20 participants, total scores and scores of some domains (i.e., cognition, getting along, life activities, and participation) were significantly lower at T2 than at T1 on both versions (p < 0.010). WHODAS-36 scores were significantly lower at T2 than at T1 for the self-care domain (p = 0.018). Except for self-care, strong correlations were found between scores from the two versions (p < 0.001). In the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Bland-Altman analysis, we found significant differences between the scores of the two versions in the mobility, self-care, and participation domains. There were no significant differences in the distribution or systematic errors between the two versions in scores for the other domains or total score.

CONCLUSION

We found strong positive correlations between WHODAS-12 and WHODAS-36 total scores with no statistical differences between them. For some domains, differences in distribution and systematic errors were found.

Equipercentile linking of the Sheehan Disability Scale and the World Health Organization Assessment Schedule 2.0 scales in people with mental disorders

BACKGROUND

The Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) and the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Scale (WHODAS 2.0) have been widely used to measure functional impairment and disability. To ensure that the scores from these two scales are practically exchangeable across diseases, therapies, and care programmes, the current study aimed to examine the linkage of the WHODAS 2.0 with the SDS and develop a simple and reliable conversion table for the two scales in people with mental disorders.

METHODS

A total of 798 patients (mean age = 36.1, SD = 12.7) were recruited from outpatient clinics of the Institute of Mental Health, and the Community Wellness Clinic in Singapore. Using a single-group design, an equipercentile equating method with log-linear smoothing was used to establish a conversion table from the SDS to the WHODAS 2.0 and vice versa.

RESULTS

The conversion table showed that the scores were consistent for the entire range of scores when the scores were converted either from the SDS to the WHODAS 2.0 or from the WHODAS 2.0 to the SDS. The agreement between the WHODAS 2.0's raw and converted scores and SDS's raw and converted scores were interpreted as good with intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.711 and 0.725, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study presents a simple and reliable method for converting the SDS scores to the WHODAS 2.0 scores and vice versa, enabling interchangeable use of data across these two disability measures.

Barriers to healthcare for Australian autistic adults

LAY ABSTRACT

This study looked at how Australian autistic and non-autistic adults experience barriers to healthcare. We asked autistic and non-autistic adults to complete the Barriers to Healthcare Checklist Short-Form (BHC). We analysed data from 263 autistic adults and 70 non-autistic adults. We found that autistic adults experienced more barriers to healthcare than non-autistic adults. Gender diversity, feeling more anxious, having greater disability and feeling unsatisfied with social support contributed to barriers to healthcare in autistic participants. We recommend interventions such as developing and implementing a national action plan, similar to the National Roadmap for Improving the Health of People with Intellectual Disability (2021) to reduce barriers and address unmet healthcare needs of Australian autistic adults. We also recommend working with autistic adults to develop new policies and strategies, implementing environmental adaptations to health care facilities, and increasing Autism education opportunities for health professionals to address gaps in knowledge.

Mapping the 12-item World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) onto the assessment of quality of life (AQoL)-4D utilities

PURPOSE

The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) is a widely used disability-specific outcome measure. This study develops mapping algorithms to estimate Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL)-4D utilities based on the WHODAS 2.0 responses to facilitate economic evaluation.

METHODS

The study sample comprises people with disability or long-term conditions (n = 3376) from the 2007 Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing. Traditional regression techniques (i.e., Ordinary Least Square regression, Robust MM regression, Generalised Linear Model and Betamix Regression) and machine learning techniques (i.e., Lasso regression, Boosted regression, Supported vector regression) were used. Five-fold internal cross-validation was performed. Model performance was assessed using a series of goodness-of-fit measures.

RESULTS

The robust MM estimator produced the preferred mapping algorithm for the overall sample with the smallest mean absolute error in cross-validation (MAE = 0.1325). Different methods performed differently for different disability subgroups, with the subgroup with profound or severe restrictions having the highest MAE across all methods and models.

CONCLUSION

The developed mapping algorithm enables cost-utility analyses of interventions for people with disability where the WHODAS 2.0 has been collected. Mapping algorithms developed from different methods should be considered in sensitivity analyses in economic evaluations.

Sertraline for anxiety in adults with a diagnosis of autism (STRATA): study protocol for a pragmatic, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are commonly prescribed to manage anxiety in adults with an autism diagnosis. However, their effectiveness and adverse effect profile in the autistic population are not well known. This trial aims to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the SSRI sertraline in reducing symptoms of anxiety and improving quality of life in adults with a diagnosis of autism compared with placebo and to quantify any adverse effects.

METHODS

STRATA is a two-parallel group, multi-centre, pragmatic, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial with allocation at the level of the individual. It will be delivered through recruiting sites with autism services in 4 regional centres in the United Kingdom (UK) and 1 in Australia. Adults with an autism diagnosis and a Generalised Anxiety Disorder Assessment (GAD-7) score ≥ 10 at screening will be randomised 1:1 to either 25 mg sertraline or placebo, with subsequent flexible dose titration up to 200 mg. The primary outcome is GAD-7 scores at 16 weeks post-randomisation. Secondary outcomes include adverse effects, proportionate change in GAD-7 scores including 50% reduction, social anxiety, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, panic attacks, repetitive behaviours, meltdowns, depressive symptoms, composite depression and anxiety, functioning and disability and quality of life. Carer burden will be assessed in a linked carer sub-study. Outcome data will be collected using online/paper methods via video call, face-to-face or telephone according to participant preference at 16, 24 and 52 weeks post-randomisation, with brief safety checks and data collection at 1-2, 4, 8, 12 and 36 weeks. An economic evaluation to study the cost-effectiveness of sertraline vs placebo and a QuinteT Recruitment Intervention (QRI) to optimise recruitment and informed consent are embedded within the trial. Qualitative interviews at various times during the study will explore experiences of participating and taking the trial medication.

DISCUSSION

Results from this study should help autistic adults and their clinicians make evidence-based decisions on the use of sertraline for managing anxiety in this population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN, ISRCTN15984604 . Registered on 08 February 2021. EudraCT 2019-004312-66. ANZCTR ACTRN12621000801819. Registered on 07 April 2021.

Minimal important difference of the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 in persons with chronic low back pain

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 12-item survey (WHODAS-12) is a questionnaire developed by the WHO to measure functioning across health conditions, cultures, and settings. WHODAS-12 consists of a subset of the 36 items of WHODAS-2.0 36-item questionnaire. Little is known about the minimal important difference (MID) of WHODAS-12 in persons with chronic low back pain (LBP), which would be useful to determine whether rehabilitation improves functioning to an extent that is meaningful for people experiencing the condition. Our objective was to estimate an anchor-based MID for WHODAS-12 questionnaire in persons with chronic LBP.

METHODS

We analyzed data from two cohort studies (identified in our previous systematic review) conducted in Europe that measured functioning using the WHODAS-36 in adults with chronic LBP. Eligible participants were adults with chronic LBP with scores on another measure as an anchor to indicate participants with small but important changes in functioning over time [Short-form-36 Physical Functioning (SF36-PF) or Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)] at baseline and follow-up (study 1: 3-months post-treatment; study 2: 1-month post-discharge from hospital). WHODAS-12 scores were constructed as sums of the 12 items (scored 0-4), with possible scores ranging from 0 to 48. We calculated the mean WHODAS-12 score in participants who achieved a small but meaningful improvement on SF36-PF or ODI at follow-up. A meaningful improvement was an MID of 4-16 on ODI or 5-16 on SF36-PF.

RESULTS

Of 70 eligible participants in study 1 (mean age = 54.1 years, SD = 14.7; 69% female), 18 achieved a small meaningful improvement based on SF-36 PF. Corresponding mean WHODAS-12 change score was - 3.22/48 (95% CI -4.79 to -1.64). Of 89 eligible participants in study 2 (mean age = 65.5 years, SD = 11.5; 61% female), 50 achieved a small meaningful improvement based on ODI. Corresponding mean WHODAS-12 change score was - 5.99/48 (95% CI - 7.20 to -4.79).

CONCLUSIONS

Using an anchor-based approach, the MID of WHODAS-12 is estimated at -3.22 (95% CI -4.79 to -1.64) or -5.99 (95% CI - 7.20 to -4.79) in adults with chronic LBP. These MID values inform the utility of WHODAS-12 in measuring functioning to determine whether rehabilitation or other health services achieve a minimal difference that is meaningful to patients with chronic LBP.

Validation of the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 in individuals with schizophrenia, depression, anxiety, and diabetes in Singapore

BACKGROUND

There is limited evidence on the reliability and validity of the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) in an Asian patient population with mental and physical disorders. The current study aimed to examine the psychometric properties of the WHODAS 2.0 among patients with schizophrenia, depression, anxiety, and diabetes.

METHODS

A total of 1076 patients (M  =  40.9 years, SD  =  14.7) were recruited from the outpatient clinics of a tertiary psychiatric hospital and a primary care clinic. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability, structural validity, convergent validity, agreement, and floor and ceiling effects were examined.

RESULTS

Our confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) showed that the 1-factor model fits our data. Multigroup CFA demonstrated metric and scalar invariance, indicating the scores can be compared across the four conditions. The WHODAS 2.0 scale had excellent reliability in the overall sample and good to excellent reliability across conditions. The test-retest reliability and agreement between self-administered and interviewer-administered modes were good. The WHODAS 2.0 scores had moderate to strong correlations with the Social and Occupational Functioning Scale and the Sheehan Disability Scale scores in the overall sample and across four conditions.

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest that the WHODAS 2.0 is a valid tool to measure functioning and disability in those with schizophrenia, anxiety, depression, and diabetes in an Asian patient population.

Measurement Properties and Minimal Important Change of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 in Persons With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To determine the measurement properties and minimal important change (MIC) of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) short (12 questions) and full (36 questions) versions in persons with nonspecific low back pain (LBP).

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, APA PsycInfo, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (inception to May 2021).

STUDY SELECTION

Eligible studies assessed measurement properties or MIC of WHODAS 2.0 in persons with LBP.

DATA EXTRACTION

Paired reviewers screened articles, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using Consensus-Based Standards for Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) and COSMIN-Outcome Measures in Rheumatology checklists.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We descriptively synthesized results stratified by measurement property and LBP duration (subacute: 6 weeks to 3 months; chronic: ≥3 months).

RESULTS

We screened 297 citations and included 14 studies (reported in 15 articles). Methodological quality of studies was very good for internal consistency and varied between very good and doubtful for construct validity, doubtful for responsiveness, and adequate for all other properties assessed. Evidence suggests that WHODAS 2.0 full version has adequate content validity (2 studies); WHODAS 2.0 short and full versions have adequate structural validity (3 studies), but construct validity is indeterminate (9 studies). WHODAS 2.0 short and full versions have adequate internal consistency (10 studies), and the full version has adequate test-retest and interrater reliability (3 studies) in persons with LBP. Minimal detectable change (MDC) was 10.45-13.99 of 100 for the full version and 8.6 of 48 for the short version in persons with LBP (4 studies). WHODAS 2.0 full version has no floor or ceiling effects, but the short version has potential floor effects in persons with chronic LBP (3 studies). One study estimated MIC for the full version as 4.87 of 100 or 9.74 of 100 (corresponding to 1- and 2-point change on 0- to 10-cm visual analog scale for pain, respectively), and 1 study estimated 3.09-4.68 of 48 for the short version.

CONCLUSIONS

In persons with LBP, WHODAS 2.0 full version has adequate content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, and reliability. WHODAS 2.0 short version has adequate structural validity and internal consistency. Construct validity of the short and full versions is indeterminate. Since MDC is estimated to be larger than MIC, users may consider both MIC and MDC thresholds to measure change in functioning for LBP.

Evidence for validity of the Swedish self-rated 36-item version of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) in patients with mental disorders: a multi-centre cross-sectional study using Rasch analysis

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) is a generic instrument for the assessment of functioning in six domains, resulting in a total health-related disability score. The aim of this study was to investigate the psychometric properties of the Swedish-language version of the self-rated 36-item version in psychiatric outpatients with various common psychiatric diagnoses using Rasch analysis. A secondary aim was to explore the correlation between two methods of calculating overall scores to guide clinical practice: the WHODAS simple (summative) model and the WHODAS complex (weighted) model.

METHODS

Cross-sectional data from 780 Swedish patients with various mental disorders were evaluated by Rasch analysis according to the partial credit model. Bivariate Pearson correlations between the two methods of calculating overall scores were explored.

RESULTS

Of the 36 items, 97% (35 items) were within the recommended range of infit mean square; only item D4.5 (Sexual activities) indicated misfit (infit mean square 1.54 logits). Rating scale analysis showed a short distance between severity levels and disordered thresholds. The two methods of calculating overall scores were highly correlated (0.89-0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

The self-administered WHODAS 2.0 fulfilled several aspects of validity according to Rasch analysis and has the potential to be a useful tool for the assessment of functioning in psychiatric outpatients. The internal structure of the instrument was satisfactorily valid and reliable at the level of the total score but demonstrated problems at the domain level. We suggest rephrasing the item Sexual activities and revising the rating scale categories. The WHODAS simple model is easier to use in clinical practice and our results indicate that it can differentiate function among patients with moderate psychiatric disability, whereas Rasch scaled scores are psychometrically more precise even at low disability levels. Further investigations of different scoring models are warranted.

Understanding the vocational functioning of autistic employees: the role of disability and mental health

PURPOSE

Employment rates for autistic people are low, despite increasing employment-focused programmes. Given the reported complexities for autistic people in finding and keeping work and flourishing there, further exploration is needed to understand how best to help employers accommodate autistic employees.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We assessed 88 employed autistic adults, without comorbid intellectual disability and examined whether self-reported disability and mental health symptoms were associated with two measures of vocational functioning: disability days off work and vocational disability.

RESULTS

Nearly half (47%) reported at least one disability day absence in the previous month. Autism severity and IQ were not associated with either measure of vocational functioning. Greater disability and higher mental health symptoms were associated with both types of vocational functioning. However, the associations of anxiety and stress with both vocational outcomes were attenuated to null in a multivariable model. Disability (B = 6.74, p = 0.009; B = 1.18, p < 0.001) and depression (B = 4.46, p = 0.035; B = 1.01, p = 0.049) remained independently associated with both outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians and vocational support programmes addressing modifiable factors may need to focus on addressing mental health comorbidities, specifically depression rather than anxiety, or core features of autism to improve vocational outcomes for autistic people. Implications for RehabilitationIndividual-level interventions that reduce disablement, particularly in social areas, and depressive symptoms as a way of reducing days off work and improving workplace activities in autistic employees are recommended.Organisations can accommodate autistic employees by encouraging use of mental health programmes or looking at how the workplace environment can be adapted to limit social disability.

Caregiver Burden and Disability in Somatoform Disorder: An Exploratory Study

BACKGROUND

Very few Indian studies have explored disability among patients with somatoform disorder and the burden experienced by their caregivers. We aimed to assess the levels of disability among patients with somatoform disorder and the levels of burden among their caregivers and compare these parameters against patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

Participants included adults with a diagnosis of somatoform disorders (F45.0-F 45.9) (n = 28) or schizophrenia (F20.0-F20.9) (n = 28) diagnosed as per the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10), clinical descriptions, and diagnostic guidelines, as well as their caregivers. The WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 and Family Burden Interview Schedule were used to assess patient disability and caregiver burden, respectively. Independent Student's t-test or chi-square test was used to compare relevant sociodemographic and clinical parameters.

RESULTS

Out of 56 patients, the mean (±SD) age of the sample was 38.6 (±10.5) years. Females constituted a slender majority of the sample (n = 29, 51.8%). The mean disability score of patients with somatoform disorders was slightly higher (83.6 ±20.9) than that of patients with schizophrenia (82.3 ±16.7). Similarly, the mean burden score of caregivers of patients with somatoform disorders was nominally higher (18.96 ±9.9) than that of caregivers of patients with schizophrenia (15.7 ±9.7). Neither of these differences approached statistical significance (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients with somatoform disorders experience considerable levels of disability, and their caregivers go through various levels of burden in their daily life that is comparable to schizophrenia.

Evaluating the Use of Self-reported Measures in Autistic Individuals in the Context of Psychiatric Assessment: A Systematic Review

The current review examined the use of self-report measures in autistic individuals in the context of psychiatric assessments. It focused on inter-rater agreement, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and criterion validity with clinical diagnoses. It also gathered information on constructs measured, the nature of the samples, and the quality of the studies. Thirty-six out of 10,557 studies met inclusion criteria. We found that the majority of studies (1) targeted young people with average or above average cognitive abilities, (2) measured anxiety symptoms, and (3) evaluated parent-child agreement. More studies are needed on individuals with lower cognitive abilities, adults, and other constructs. Studies assessing criterion validity and test-retest reliability are also needed.

Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the 12-item Arabic World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) as a screening tool for Syrian refugees

Background

The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) is a generic measure of functional impairment and disability but to date no studies have reported its applicability in a population of Syrian refugees.

Aims

The aim of this study was to explore the psychometric properties and factor structure of the Arabic version of the WHODAS 2.0 among a population of Syrian refugees in a Jordanian refugee camp setting. The tool was used as part of a screening procedure for a randomised controlled trial assessing the effectiveness of a low-intensity psychological intervention.

Method

A representative sample of Syrian refugees (n = 650) were screened to assess levels of functional impairment and psychological distress. The screening results were used to explore the internal consistency and dimensionality of the WHODAS 2.0. We assessed level of convergence with the validated Kessler 10-item Psychological Distress Scale (K10), which assesses psychological distress. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were conducted to explore the construct validity and factor structure of the WHODAS 2.0.

Results

The mean baseline WHODAS 2.0 score was 20.5 (s.d. = 7.6). The internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach's alpha 0.74), with all 12-items appearing to be related to the same construct. The WHODAS 2.0 was positively correlated with the K10 (r = 0.57, P < 0.001). The results of the EFA identified a three-factor solution accounting for 51% of variation, corresponding with factors related to self-activities, external activities and self-care. CFA results indicated good fit of the three-factor solution.

Conclusions

The results indicated that the WHODAS 2.0 has a three-factor solution and is an acceptable screening tool for use among Syrian refugees.

Psychometric evaluation of the Swedish self-rated 36-item version of WHODAS 2.0 for use in psychiatric populations - using classical test theory

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Swedish version of the self-rated 36-item WHODAS 2.0 in patients from Swedish psychiatric outpatient settings, using classical test theory.

METHODS

The 36-item WHODAS 2.0, together with the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), was filled in by a sample of 780 participating psychiatric patients: 512 (65.6%) women, 263 (33.7%) men, and 5 (0.6%) who did not report any sex.

RESULTS

The internal consistency, measured by Cronbach's alpha, for the different domains of functioning were between 0.70 and 0.94, and interpreted as good. The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) revealed two levels: the first level consisted of a general disability factor, while the second level consisted of the six domains of the scale, respectively. The model had borderline fit. There was a significant correlation between WHODAS 2.0 36-item and SDS (n = 395). The WHODAS 2.0 differed significantly between diagnostic groups.

CONCLUSION

The present study demonstrates that the Swedish self-rated 36-item version of WHODAS 2.0, within a psychiatric outpatient population, showed good reliability and convergent validity. We conclude that the self-rated 36-item Swedish version of WHODAS 2.0 can be used for valid interpretations of disability in patients with psychiatric health conditions.

Using the Ecological Validity Model to adapt parent-involved interventions for children with Autism Spectrum Disorder in the Latinx community: A conceptual review

BACKGROUND

Parent involvement in interventions for children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) provides parents with education about ASD diagnosis and treatment, improves parent-child interactions, and offers access to cost-effective resources. The Latinx population represents the fastest growing minority population in the United States and a growing percentage of children seeking ASD intervention services.

AIMS

Identify factors that impact Latinx parent involvement in interventions for children with ASD as an example of cultural considerations for diverse families and communities.

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

In this conceptual overview, we synthesize literature on cultural considerations for intervention design/adaptation for Latinx families and parent involvement in interventions for children with ASD through the lens of the Ecological Validity Model.

OUTCOMES AND RESULTS

Frameworks such as the Ecological Validity Model can be used when creating or adapting interventions for specific cultural groups. Parent-involved interventions for children with ASD in the Latinx community should consider language of intervention delivery, family make-up, community support, disability knowledge of the family, the therapeutic alliance, and methods of implementation.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Incorporating cultural components into parent-involved interventions will best support intervention implementation and dissemination in diverse communities. Research is needed into the process and outcomes of intervention programs in order to increase understanding of how specific cultural dimensions impact participation in and efficacy of parent-involved interventions for Latinx families of children with ASD.

Social anxiety symptoms in autism spectrum disorder and social anxiety disorder: Considering the reliability of self-report instruments in adult cohorts

Adults with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are at elevated risk for social anxiety disorder (SAD). Limited information exists on the reliability of social anxiety instruments with these adults and their performance when compared to individuals with SAD without ASD. This study examines psychometric properties of self-report social anxiety instruments in autistic adults without intellectual disability, compared to adults with SAD. Additionally, we compared instrument scores between a subgroup of autistic adults with a dual diagnosis of SAD (ASD + SAD) and adults with SAD only. Adults diagnosed with SAD (N = 316) or ASD (N = 102) were recruited from the Brain and Mind Centre in New South Wales, Australia. Sixty autistic participants also received a diagnosis of SAD (ASD + SAD). Participants completed the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale-self-report, the Social Interaction Anxiety Scale, the Social Phobia Scale, and the Brief Fear of Negative Evaluation Scale. All instruments showed excellent internal consistency in autistic adults. The instruments showed evidence of convergent validity, and the strength of relationships between measures were equivalent between ASD and SAD groups. For all instruments, performance of these instruments in autistic adults with a SAD diagnosis was very similar to performance in adults diagnosed with SAD but without ASD. Findings support the use of these instruments for identifying social anxiety symptoms in autistic adults without intellectual disability and have utility for mental health clinical services. LAY SUMMARY: Autistic adults often experience social anxiety. We examined the use of four social anxiety questionnaires in autistic adults, compared to adults with SAD. We found similar results between autistic adults and adults with SAD, suggesting that these questionnaires can be useful for measuring social anxiety symptoms in autistic adults. These findings have implications for clinical services, as they show that these instruments are reliable when used with autistic adults.

Psychometric properties of the Polish version of the 36-item WHODAS 2.0 in patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis

Purpose

To examine psychometric properties of the Polish version of the 36-item WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) in the population with hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA).

Methods

This was a longitudinal study with repeated measures during retest examinations. Subjects from a Polish Specialist Hospital (age = 68.3 ± 9.2years, 71% female, 44.2% knee OA, 55.8% hip OA) were tested three times. They completed the Polish version of the 36-item WHODAS 2.0, the SF-36 Health Survey 2.0, the Western Ontario and Macmaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index 3.1, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and the Numerical Rating Scale.

Results

The 36-item WHODAS 2.0—Polish version demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha for total = 0.94), and test–retest reliability (Total ICC_2,1 = 0.98). High construct validity was found as 12 out of 15 a priori hypotheses (80%) were confirmed. Most domains and Total Scores in the 36-item WHODAS 2.0 (Total ES = − 0.62, SMR = − 1.09) showed a moderate degree of responsiveness. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the Total WHODAS 2.0 was 3.29 in patients undergoing rehabilitation for knee or hip OA.

Conclusions

The Polish version of the 36-item WHODAS 2.0 assesses disability according to ICF in a reliable, valid and responsive way. Therefore, it provides considerable support in clinical practice and national and international scientific research of patients with hip or knee OA.

Psychometric properties and validation of the polish version of the 12-item WHODAS 2.0

Background

The assessment of disability in a population is an important part of public health management. In this article, we examine the psychometric properties and validation of the Polish version of the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0. (12-item WHODAS 2.0).

Methods

A systematic random sample comprised 584 adult urban residents. The Polish version of the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 and the World Health Organization Quality of Life-BREF, Short Form (WHOQOL-BREF) questionnaire were used to assess disability and quality of life, respectively. Basic sociodemographic data and selected health-related data (e.g., pain and depressive moods) were also collected.

Results

Good scale score reliability for the entire tool was confirmed in the study population (Cronbach’s α = 0.90; Composite reliability = 0.95). In confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), satisfactory values of the fit indices were obtained (comparative fit index, CFI = 0.999; Tucker-Lewis Index, TLI = 0.999; root mean square error of approximation, RMSEA = 0.004; standardized root mean square residual, SRMR = 0.043, p = 0.454). Good consistency was noted over time (correlation coefficient = 0.88). The tool was found to have an appropriate level of validity.

Conclusions

We found that the 12-item WHODAS is short and easy to use, and it is suitable for use in the form of an interview during screening tests. This tool is appropriate for measuring the health status, functioning, and disability of an average population. It may be more relevant for studying populations with health problems. The 12-item WHODAS can be used to successfully obtain information about the general level of disability in a population.

Propriedades psicométricas do WHODAS para uso em pessoas com chikungunya no Brasil

RESUMO O objetivo deste estudo é validar um instrumento de aferição da funcionalidade segundo a proposta conceitual da Classificação Internacional de Funcionalidade, Incapacidade e Saúde, para uso em pessoas pós-chikungunya. Este é um estudo de validação com indivíduos >17 anos, de ambos os sexos, em atendimento para manejo clínico da chikungunya. A coleta de dados foi realizada por meio de entrevistas coletando informações sobre funcionalidade (WHODAS), qualidade de vida (WHOQOL-bref) e sociodemográficas. A análise estatística usou o coeficiente alfa de Cronbach (consistência interna) e coeficiente de correlação de Spearman (validade convergente), médias e desvios-padrão para a determinação do perfil de qualidade de vida, com nível de significância de 5%. A amostra foi composta por 68 indivíduos. Os valores médios das pontuações dos instrumentos foram: 45,4 (±16,38) para o WHODAS e 12,1 (±2,10) para o WHOQOL-bref. O alfa de Cronbach do valor total foi de α=0,93; todos os domínios do WHODAS apresentaram valores acima de 0,75. O valor total do WHODAS 2.0 apresentou forte correlação com o domínio físico (r=−0,74) e moderada correlação com os domínios psicológico (r=−0,68) e social (r=−0,42) do WHOQOL-bref. Os resultados indicam que o WHODAS 2.0 é um instrumento válido para a mensuração da autopercepção de alteração da funcionalidade em pacientes acometidos pela chikungunya, capaz de fornecer dados que podem ajudar a construir um perfil de impacto da doença no perfil de funcionalidade dessa população.