Associations between a Functional Independence Measure (WeeFIM) and the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL4.0) in Young Children with Physical Disabilities
Référence bibliographique 
Grilli, Lisa, Ehrmann Feldman, Debbie, Majnemer, Annette, Couture, Mélanie, Azoulay, Laurent et Swaine, Bonnie. 2006. «Associations between a Functional Independence Measure (WeeFIM) and the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL4.0) in Young Children with Physical Disabilities ». Quality of Life Research, vol. 15, no 6, p. 1023-1031.
Intentions : « [The aim of this study was] To determine the association between functional status, measured by the WeeFIM [functional independence measure] and health related quality of life (HRQL), measured by the PedsQL4.0 [pediatric quality of life inventory] for children with physical disabilities. To explore child, parent and service-related factors associated with each of these measures. » (p. 1023)
Échantillon/Matériau : « Parents of 115 children (2–5 years) with physical disabilities who were referred to occupational (OT) or physical therapy (PT). Mean age of the children was 3 years 7 months (±10 months), 79 were boys and 67 were diagnosed with global developmental delay. » (p. 1023)
Instruments : - Questionnaire de recherche - WeeFIM - PedsQL4.0
Types de traitement des données : Analyse statistique
« The WeeFIM selfcare and mobility subscales, as well as the PedsQL-Physical Health Summary scores appear to measure somewhat similar physical dimensions of health and functioning. Our results indicate that these scores for children with physical disabilities are fair to moderately correlated. The WeeFIM subscales and the Peds-QL-Psychosocial Health score however measure different aspects of a child’s health and well-being. It should be emphasized that parents of children with lower functional skills can nevertheless perceive a good quality of life for their children. The results of the study support the need to incorporate complementary measures that are not only focused on function but also include general health and life quality when measuring the overall status of children with disabilities. This would provide professionals with a better indicator of physical, social and emotional well-being and how well a child is performing and integrating in his environment. This would shift the focus of rehabilitation goals to promoting and enhancing health and wellbeing, rather than the traditional emphasis on preventing and minimizing long term disabilities and impairments, which would be in accordance with the recent expansion of the health concept by the WHO [World Health Organization]. » (pp. 1029-1030)
When and by Whom is Concern First Expressed for Children with Neuromotor Problems?
Référence bibliographique 
Ehrmann Feldman, Debbie, Couture, Melanie, Grilli, Lisa, Simard, Marie-Noelle, Azoulay, Laurent et Gosselin, Julie. 2005. «When and by Whom is Concern First Expressed for Children with Neuromotor Problems? ». Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, vol. 159, no 9, p. 882-886.
Intentions : « The objective of our study was to determine the child’s age at the time of initial recognition of the problem (’Age at initial concern’) by either the parent or the physician in a cohort of children with neuromotor disabilities (aged 0-6 years) who were referred to rehabilitation. » (p. 882)
Échantillon/Matériau : « We conducted a survey of parents of 92 children (aged 0-6 years) who were on the waiting list for physical or occupational therapy services at rehabilitation centers in Montreal, Quebec. » (p. 882)
Instruments : « Parents were interviewed regarding their child’s medical history and utilization of health care services. » (p. 882) « The interview included questions regarding the medical history of the child, the child’s diagnosis (according to the parent), who first noticed that there was a problem and when this was noticed, current use of services, burden of care (as a proxy for severity), family empowerment, date of referral to rehabilitation services, and demographic data. Burden of care (severity) was measured by the WeeFIM (Functional Independence Measure for Children) [Msall & al., 1994], a reliable and valid tool that is scored on 3 subscales (self-care, mobility, and cognition) in addition to a total score. Family empowerment was measured by the service system subscale of the Family Empowerment Scale, a reliable and valid scale that measures empowerment on a scale of 0 (least empowered) to 60 (most empowered) [Koren & al., 1992]. » (p. 883)
Type de traitement des données : Analyse statistique
« Parents were concerned later than physicians were regarding their child’s development (mean difference, 8.2 months; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.7-12.6 months). There was no significant difference in time of recognition of problems between the premature (10.2 months) and full-term (11.9 months) groups. Even after controlling for risk group, parental concern occurred later than physician concern (beta coefficient, 7.3; 95% CI, 2.5-12.2). The child’s age at the time of initial concern was associated with the child’s age at referral to rehabilitation (beta coefficient, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.01-0.06). Early recognition is important if a child is to benefit from early rehabilitation. It may be important to improve primary care screening of children for neuromotor problems and to increase parental awareness regarding normal motor development of their children. Prompt, simultaneous referral to medical evaluation and rehabilitation resources may decrease delays in rehabilitation. » (p. 882)