International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Linking of the “Integration von Menschen mit Behinderungen in die Arbeitswelt ” (IMBA) to the “International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health” (ICF) Stien Hennaert (GTB) Saskia Decuman (NIHDI) Dominique Van de Velde (Ugent) Huget Désiron (KU Leuven )

BACKGROUNDS The priority of Return To work  Backgrounds  Positive effects of employment on health  Objectives  Work disability  societal burden  Methods The challenge of workable work  Results  The influence of external and personal factors  Conclusion  Work related  Non-work related  Work demands ↔ individual capacity  Assess  Match  Adjust (Heerkens et al., 2004; Waddell&Burtion,2006; OECD, 2010; Pacolet et al, 2016; Pacolet&Wispelare, 2016; Heerkens et al., 2017; NIHDI, 2018 )

BACKGROUNDS  Backgrounds Towards the assessment of work capacity  Disability  A bility  Objectives  Functional Capacity Evaluation  needs the  Methods assessment of multiple constructs  Results  Need for tools/assessments to assess work  Conclusion capacity  Multidimensional  Efficiently  Need for a conceptual framework and common language (OECD, 2010; Finger et al., 2012; Reneman, 2015)

BACKGROUNDS ICF in RTW: opportunities and challanges  Backgrounds  Objectives  Reference framework  Functional Capacity Evaluation (FCE)  Methods  Vocational Rehabilitation (core set ICF-VR)  Results  Social security ( core set ICF-SS)  Conclusion  However: not specifically developed in context of RTW  Lack of a dynamical aspect  work prognosis?  Lack of work-related concepts in ICF  not covered or not defined (Heerkens et al., 2004; Brage et al., 2008; Anner et al., 2012; Finger et al., 2012; Reneman, Soer & Gross, 2013; Escorpizo & Stucki, 2013; Finger et al., 2016; Heerkens et al.,2017)

BACKGROUNDS IMBA in RTW: opportunities and challenges  Backgrounds  Developed in 1996 by IQPR  Objectives  Work-related documentation tool  Based on profile comparison  Methods  Work ability profile ↔ work requirement profile  Results  Standardized set of defined items  Activity and- context related  Conclusion 1. Body Posture  70 main items 2. Bodily Locomotion  108 detail items 3. Body Part Movement 4. Information  9 main characteristics 5. Complex Physical  Scoring system Characteristics  Ordinal scale (0-5) 6. Environmental Influences 7. Occupational Safety  Dichotomous scale (yes/no) 8. Work Organization 9. Key Qualifications (Schian et al., 1996; BMAS, 2000; Kersting & Kaiser, 2002; Adenaur, 2004; Kaiser, 2004; Mozdzanowski & Glatz, 2013)

BACKGROUNDS  Backgrounds IMBA profile comparison  Objectives  Methods  Results  Conclusion

Objectives  Backgrounds Primary objective  linking IMBA-ICF  Objectives  Concepts  Methods  Scoring systems  Results  Conclusion Secondary objectives  Compare IMBA to ICF core sets: ICF-SS, ICF-VR  Evaluate relevance of IMBA in RTW and (dis)ability  Evaluate possible integration of IMBA and ICF

Methods  Process consisting of 7 steps  Backgrounds  Objectives  Methods  Results  Conclusion

Methods  Backgrounds  Objectives  Methods  Results  Conclusion

Results  Backgrounds Linking outcome (concepts)  70 IMBA items  107 concepts  Objectives  94 concepts  87 different ICF categories (mostly  Methods third level)  Results  41  activities and participation (d)  Conclusion  39  body functions (b)  7  environmental factors (e)  10 concepts  ‘not defined’ in ICF  1 concept  partially ‘not defined’ in ICF  2 concepts  ‘not covered’ in ICF

Results  Backgrounds Fragment IMBA-ICF linking table  Objectives  Methods  Results  Conclusion

Results  Backgrounds Linking outcome (concepts)  Objectives IMBA MAIN CHARACTERISTICS ICF COMPONENTS Body Posture (1)  Methods Exclusively Bodily Locomotion (2) ‘activities and participation ’  Results Body Part Movement (3) ‘ activities and participation ’ Information (4)  Conclusion AND/OR Complex Physical Characteristics ‘body functions ’ (5) Key Qualifications (9) ‘orderliness’ and ‘punctuality’ Not defined Environmental factors Environmental Influences (6) Not covered Occupational Safety (7) Not defined Work organization(8)

Results  Backgrounds IMBA documents information about?  Transformed to first level of ICF  Objectives  Mental functions  Methods  Sensory functions and pain BODY FUNCTIONS  Neuromusculoskeletal and  Results movement-related functions  Conclusion  Learning and applying knowledge  Mobility ACTIVITIES AND  General tasks and demands PARTICIPATION  Communication  Interpersonal interactions and relationships  Natural environment and ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS human made changes to environment’

Results  Backgrounds Comparison of IMBA to ICF core sets  Objectives  ICF-SS  covered by IMBA to great extend  Methods  Results  ICF-VR (brief)  covered by IMBA to great extend  Conclusion  ICF-VR(brief) = more extensive in environmental factors  ICF-VR (comprehensive)  great overlap  ICF-VR (comprehensive) = more extensive in environmental factors and activities and participation

Results  Backgrounds Linking outcome (scoring systems)  Objectives  Theoretical frameworks: IMBA ≠ ICF  Methods  IMBA scale: resource-oriented/abilities  Results  ICF scale: impairments/difficulties  Conclusion  Explorative IMBA-ICF conversion  Proposal based on expert opinion  Can be used in practical setting (for now)

Results  Backgrounds IMBA-ICF ordinal scale  Objectives  Methods  Results  Conclusion

Results  Backgrounds IMBA-ICF dichotomous scale  Objectives  Methods  Results  Conclusion

Conclusion  Backgrounds  Integration possible to great extend  Objectives  IMBA and ICF  complement each other  Methods  Strengths IMBA  Results  Profile comparison  focus = work capacity  Conclusion  Specific and relevant work-related items  Work demands taken into account  Strengths ICF  Reference framework

Conclusion  Backgrounds Further developments  Objectives  ICF  Methods  Extended terminology  work-related categories  Classification of personal factors  Results  Conclusion  IMBA  Possible additions (ICF-VR)  Linking of the scoring systems  Pilot study  evaluate explorative linking  In depth quantitative research

Affiliations Stien Hennaert, MSc in Occupational Therapy. Member of staff GTB (Flemish Vocational Rehabilitation Service), Belgium. Dominique Van de Velde, Prof, Dr. Faculty of Revalidation Sciences, Ghent University, Belgium. Saskia Decuman, Dr. Faculty of Medicine and Health, Ghent University, Belgium; Expert Research and Development at National Institute of Health and Disability Insurance Huget Désiron, Dr. Faculty Biomedical Sciences - Environment and Health, University Leuven (KU Leuven), Belgium; Teacher Occupational therapy at PXL; Founder and CEO ACT Désiron.

Bibliography Adenauer, S.(2004). Die (Re)Integration leistungsgewandelter Mitarbeider in den Arbeitsprozess. Das projekt FILM bei FORD Köln. Angew. Arbeistwis , 181: 1-18. Brage,S., Donceel, P., & Falez,F.(2009). Development of ICF core set for disability evaluation in social security. Disability and Rehabilitation, 30(18), 1392-1396. Cieza,A., Fayed,N., Bickenbach,J. & Prodinger,B. (2016). Refinements of the ICF Linking Rules to strengthen their potential for establishing comparability of health information. Disability and Rehabilitation . Escorpizo, R., & Stucki, G.(2013). Disability Evaluation, Social Security, and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. The time is now. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 55(6), 644-651. Finger,E.M., De Bie, R., Selb,M., & Escorpizo, R.(2016). An examination of concepts in vocational rehabilitation that could not be linked to the ICF based on an analysis of secondary data. Work , 53(4), 775-792. Finger, M.E., Escorpizo, R., Glässel, A., Gmünder, H.P., Lückenkemper , M., Chan, C.,… Cieza, A.(2012). ICF Core Set for Vocational Rehabiliation: results of an international consensus conference. Disability and Rehabilitation , 34(5), 429- 438. German Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (BMAS). (2000). IMBA introduction. Retrieved from: http://www.imba.de/documents/einfuehrungenglisch.pdf