應用系統性文獻回顧檢視世界衛生組織障礙評估量表（WHODAS 2.0）之信效度指標做為台灣新制身心障礙功能評估工具之可行性

To Examine the Assessment Feasibility of WHODAS 2.0 in Taiwan: A System Literatures Review

邱慈穎(Tzu-Ying Chiu)；嚴嘉楓(Chia-Feng Yen)

世界衛生組織障礙評估量表 ； 信度 ； 效度 ； World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 ； WHODAS 2.0 ； reliability ； validity

身心障礙研究季刊

12卷4期（2014 / 12 / 01）

175 - 190

繁體中文

台灣過去身心障礙鑑定多以醫療觀點的判定為主，但伴隨著全球對障礙定義及觀念的轉變，以疾病為導向的思維模式無法將身心障礙者狀態完整描繪。因此，台灣新制身心障礙鑑定中的功能評估期待以多面向的觀點來了解身心障礙者的失能狀況。並於2012年將世界衛生組織身心障礙評估量表（World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0, WHODAS2.0）做為功能鑑定評估工具之一，建構一套完整且適用於本土化的身心障礙評估工具，工具本身之信效度尤其重要，因此本研究嘗試應用系統性文獻回顧檢視過去十年中，各國應用WHODAS 2.0進行信效度指標及其相關研究的概況比較，評析WHODAS 2.0作為新制身心障礙鑑定工具的適合性。本研究依據自訂的檢索規則共挑選出12篇文獻，綜合來看，其信度指標內部一致性，數值皆高於0.5；再測信度高於0.2；施測者間信度高於0.7；效度指標中的內容效度及同時效度皆有部分關聯性存在；探索性因素分析所萃取出來之因素為5-7個不等，而解釋力皆高於55%；在驗證性因素分析上，因素負荷量皆高於0.56，但配適度指標並不完整。由於本文為初探性研究，因此，未來是否將更多本土化的因素納入使得評估工具更具其意義需待後續更多實證性研究釐清。

To enhance the social participation of people with disabilities in Taiwan, the government applies the comprehensive assessment of WHODAS 2.0 to understanding and assessing the limitations in activity and social participation of people with disabilities. Therefore, the purpose of the study is to review the indicators the reliability and validity status of WHODAS 2.0 in the world, and to examine the assessment feasibility in disability evaluation system. A series of keywords are searched, 12 were selected to analysis from 325 articles. The overall results showed the reliability of Cronbach's α, test-retest and inter-rater reliability in the WHODAS 2.0 were more than 0.5, 0.2 and 0.7, respectively. The content validity and concurrent validity was accepted, the construct validity, the model was explained total variance was more than 55% by the exploratory factor analysis, the factor loading value is more than 0.56, but fit indicators were less accepted in confirmatory factor analysis. The results should be considered as a preliminary study, and the still need more consideration in further study.

1. Buist-Bouwman, M. A.,Ormel, J.,De Graaf, R.,Vilagut, G.,Alonso, J.,Van Sonderen, E.,(2008).Psychometric properties of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule used in the European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders.International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research,17(4),185-197.
2. Chiu, T. Y.,Yen, C.F.,Chou, C.H.,Lin, J.D.,Hwang, A.W.,Liao, H.F.(2014).Development of traditional Chinese version of World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 36 - item (WHODAS 2.0) in Taiwan: Validity and reliability analyses.Research in Developmental Disabilities,35(11),2812-2820.
3. Federici, S.,Meloni, F.,Mancini, A.,Lauriola, M.,Olivetti Belardinelli, M.(2009).World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule II: Contribution to the Italian validation.Disability Rehabilitation,31(7),553-564.
4. Garin, O.,Ayuso-Mateos, J. L.,Almansa, J.,Nieto, M.,Chatterji, S.,Vilagut, G.(2010).Validation of the "World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule, WHODAS-2" in patients with chronic diseases.Health Quality Life Outcomes,8,51.
5. Guilera, G.,Gomez-Benito, J.,Pino, O.,Rojo, J. E.,Cuesta, M. J.,Martinez-Aran, A.(2012).Utility of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II in schizophrenia.Schizophrenia Research,138(2),240-247.
6. Küçükdeveci, A. A.,Kutlay, Ş.,Yıldızlar, D.,Oztuna, D.,Elhan, A. H.,Tennant, A.(2013).The reliability and validity of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS-II) in stroke.Disability & Rehabilitation,35(3),214-220.
7. Kutlay, S.,Kucukdeveci, A. A.,Elhan, A. H.,Oztuna, D.,Koc, N.,Tennant, A.(2011).Validation of the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule II (WHODAS-II) in patients with osteoarthritis.Rheumatology International,31(3),339-346.
8. Mas-Expósito, L.,Amador-Campos, J. A.,Gómez-Benito, J.,Lalucat-Jo, L.(2012).The World Health Organization Short Disability Assessment Schedule: a validation study in patients with schizophrenia.Comprehensive Psychiatry,53(2),208-216.
9. Meesters, J. J.,Verhoef, J.,Liem, I. S.,Putter, H.,Vliet Vlieland, T. P.(2010).Validity and responsiveness of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II to assess disability in rheumatoid arthritis patients.Rheumatolog,49(2),326-333.
10. Oliver, M.(1996).Understanding Disability: From Theory to Practice.united kingdom:Palgrave Macmillan.
11. Sousa, R. M.,Dewey, M. E.,Acosta, D.,Jotheeswaran, A. T.,Castro-Costa, E.,Ferri, C. P.(2010).Measuring disability across cultures-the psychometric properties of the WHODAS II in older people from seven low- and middle-income countries. The 10/66 Dementia Research Group population-based survey.International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research,19(1),1-17.
12. Teng, S. W.,Yen, C. F.,Liao, H. F.,Chang, K. H.,Chi, W. C.,Wang, Y. H.(2013).Evolution of system for disability assessment based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health: A Taiwanese study.Journal of the Formosan Medical Association,112(11),691-698.
13. Üstün, T. B.,Kostanjsek, N.,Chatterji, S.,Rehm, J.(2010).Measuring Health and Disability: Manual for WHO Disability Assessment Schedule.WHO.
14. Von Korff, M.,Crane, P. K.,Alonso, J.,Vilagut, G.,Angermeyer, M. C.,Bruffaerts, R.(2008).Modified WHODAS-II provides valid measure of global disability but filter items increased skewness.Journal of Clinical Epidemiology,61(11),1132-1143.
15. Wolf, A. C.,Tate, R. L.,Lannin, N. A.,Middleton, J.,Lane-Brown, A.,Cameron, I. D.(2012).The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Scale, WHODAS II: Reliability and validity in the measurement of activity and participation in a spinal cord injury population.Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine,44(9),747-755.
16. Yen, C.-F.,Hwang, A.-W.,Liou, T.-H.,Chiu, T.-Y.,Hsu, H.-Y.,Chi, W.-C.(2014).Validity and reliability of the Functioning Disability Evaluation Scale-Adult Version based on the WHODAS 2.0-36 items.Journal of the Formosan Medical Association,113(11),839-849.
17. Zhao, H. P.,Liu, Y.,Li, H. L.,Ma, L.,Zhang, Y. J.,Wang, J.(2013).Activity limitation and participation restrictions of breast cancer patients receiving chemotherapy: Psychometric properties and validation of the Chinese version of the WHODAS 2.0.Quality of Life Research,22(4),897-906.