Different ways of using qualifiers

Posted In CategoryUsing qualifiers (those in ICF, creating new qualifiers etc.)
  • Stefanus Snyman 1 year ago

    The "official" and "correct" way to use ICF qualifiers are often disregarded and there are various "hybrids qualifiers". It will be interesting to have a discussion and to share how people are using the "official" qualifiers and how they are applying "custom-made" qualifiers.

  • Catherine Sykes 1 year ago

    Australian national data collections use two concepts in defining disability; 'Difficulty' which equates to the ICF generic qualifier and 'Assistance'. A second qualifier for activities was developed; 'Assistance with activities'. 

    Recognising, through a literature review, that it was important to represent the perspective of the individual as well as an objective measure, the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare also developed a second qualifier 'Satisfaction with participation', a subjective measure to go with 'Extent of Participation' (the ICF generic qualifier).

    See the Functioning and Disability Data Set Specification http://meteor.aihw.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/348268

    The first of these new qualifiers has been used in administrative data collections. Reports on the data can also be found on the AIHW website. 

  • Heidi Anttila 1 year ago

    The National Institute for Health and Welfare in Finland has published ICF qualifiers exactly as described in the ICF appendix. These qualifiers are intended to be utilized in     health and social care information systems when doing structured documentation of functioning. 

    However, there is a discussion that critizizes the qualifiers because they only record disability and not strengths. There is a strong wish from social and health professionals to be able to document stengths in a person's functioning as well, not just those issue he/she has difficulties with. This is even more important now that the person can read the professionals  reports in an online  national health archive, that the person can access anytime. The frequent claim is that no-one does not want to read only negative reports of oneself.

    Does anyone have any suggestions how to document strengths? The existing qualifiers allow recording only 0=no problem, that could be regarded positive. 




Please login or register to leave a response.

Nelson Mandela University
Developed and hosted by the Centre for Community Technologies, Nelson Mandela University, South Africa
South African Medical Research Council
Sponsored by WHO-FIC Collaborating Centre at the South African Medical Research Council