Search

Background: Quality of life (QoL) is regarded as a framework to enhance inclusive education outcomes in different domains for all students, especially for those with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD). Assessment tools are needed to implement this framework. Although there is a long trajectory of QoL assessment in people with IDD, we identify a lack of instruments for students with IDD who attend to general education contexts., Aims: The goal of this study is to produce a pool of items in order to develop a field-test version of a QoL instrument for this target group., Methods: 14 educational professionals participated in a four-round Delphi study, assessing the content of the items proposed according to four criteria (suitability, importance, observability and sensitivity)., Results: The results of this study provided evidence of content validity regarding the pool of items that will be included in a field-test version., Conclusions: The results obtained are important for the development of a QoL assessment tool to improve the inclusion of students with IDD in general education settings., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The sequelae and disabilities that follow an acquired brain injury (ABI) may negatively affect quality of life (QoL). The main objective of the study is to describe the QoL after an ABI and identify the predictors of a better QoL. Methods : Prospective cohort study with follow-up measurement after one-year. The sample comprised 203 adults with ABIs (64% male) aged 18-86 years ( M = 53.01, SD = 14.44). Stroke was the main etiology of the injury (55.7%), followed by a TBI (32.8%), and the average time since injury was 8 years ( M = 8.25, SD = 7.83, range = 0.5-47.5). Patients assessed their QoL through the scale Calidad de Vida en Daño Cerebral (CAVIDACE self-reported version; "quality of life in brain injury" in English), an ABI-specific tool based on the eight-domain QoL model. Other variables measured were: depression, self-awareness, community integration, resilience, and social support at baseline and one-year follow-up. Results : The studied factors showed few significant changes over time. The analyses showed statistically significant differences in QoL scores in several sociodemographic (age, civil status, education, legal capacity, and dependency), injury-related (time, location, and comorbidity), rehabilitation, and personal-social variables (self-awareness, depression, social support, resilience, and community integration). The levels of dependency, depression, and satisfaction with social support were independent predictors of the total QoL score one-year follow-up. Conclusions : QoL after ABI depends on multiple elements that must be considered. There are factors such as satisfaction with social support, depression, community integration, and resilience that must be monitored throughout the rehabilitation process.

Purpose: The disability and resulting dependence after acquired brain injury (ABI) significantly reduces quality of life (QoL), making the correct assessment of QoL important. However, the instruments currently used to assess QoL are either reductionist, including only health-related aspects, or, like the CAVIDACE scale, are based on multidimensional models but ignore the individual's perspective. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to validate the self-report version of the CAVIDACE scale., Method: The sample consisted of 345 adults with ABI aged between 18 and 91 years (M = 54.83; SD = 14.91). The participants' QoL was evaluated by professionals and family members and by the participants themselves, using the original version of the CAVIDACE scale and an adapted self-report version. The following complementary variables were also measured: social support, depression, community integration, and resilience., Results: The results supported the internal structure of the scale based on the theoretical model. According to this model, QoL is composed of eight first-order intercorrelated domains (RMSEA = 0.050, CFI = 0.891, TLI = 0.881). The internal consistency, determined by omega rank, was adequate in seven of the eight domains, ranging between 0.66 (PW) and 0.87 (SI). The convergent and discriminant validity of the scale was very good overall., Conclusions: The self-report version of the CAVIDACE was demonstrated to be a specific instrument with very good psychometric properties and is a very useful complement in the assessment of QoL in people with ABI.

Purpose: A common and frequent consequence of an acquired brain injury (ABI) is the diminished quality of life (QoL) of affected people. Because the majority of existing QoL instruments assess health-related domains, new instruments that allow for the evaluation of the QoL from an integral perspective that considers the context and personal factors of the individual are warranted. Hence, the purpose of this study is to develop and validate an instrument with these characteristics., Methods: The CAVIDACE scale is a new 64-item specific instrument to assess QoL in people with ABI based on a third-person perspective. The validation sample comprises 421 adults with ABI, with ages ranging from 17 to 90 years (M = 53.12; SD = 14.87). The scale was completed by 97 professionals and 58 family members. Validity evidence based on the internal structure of the scale was provided through confirmatory factor analyses. Reliability was analyzed in terms of internal consistency and inter-rater reliability., Results: The results supported the internal structure of the scale, based on the theoretical and assessment framework in which QoL is composed of eight intercorrelated first-order domains (CFI = 0.890, RMSEA = 0.065, SRMR = 0.071). The internal consistency was good or excellent for the eight domains (ordinal alpha ranging from 0.77 to 0.93). The inter-rater reliability was very high (0.97)., Conclusions: The CAVIDACE scale is found to be a specific instrument with excellent psychometric properties that is helpful for the assessment of QoL in people with ABI, both in clinical practice and for research purposes.