Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
without a comparatively real qualitative leap. The psychological variables included in the
ICF personal factors can make substantial differences to the rehabilitation process and,
particularly, they play a central role during the ATA process. The lifestyle, the coping style,
the social and cultural background, or the character style really determines the success of
matching the person with technology. An appropriate psychological evaluation or a pre-
cise clinical intervention with the user/client and/or their significant human context over
the course of the whole AT assignment process may prevent, for example, the abandon-
ment or the discard of the assistive solution provided and is a big problem in the matching
outcome. It is reasonable to assume that the lack of importance given to the “systemic”
skills of the psychologist in the process of matching the person with technology is largely
due to the noncoding of personal factors in the ICF.
The ICIDH needed to be revised because it needed to include environmental factors into
the coding scheme (Pfeiffer 1998); today we claim that the ICF needs to be revised because
there is an urgent need to develop personal factors (see also Steiner et al. 2002). Moreover,
as Geyh and colleagues remark, concluding a recent literature review on the conceptual-
ization of the personal factors component of ICF, personal factors “have not been studied
extensively or are undervalued (Lehman 2003; Threats 2007; Cruice 2008; Weigl et al. 2008)
[…]. It is suggested that one aim of further research should be the development of PF cat-
egories within the ICF (Khan and Pallant 2007)” (2011, p. 1097).
8.3 The Personal Factors of Functioning and Disability
The recent literature review, already cited in the previous paragraph—carried out by
Geyh along with other eminent scholars of the ICF Research Branch and Classifications,
Terminology, and Standards Team of the WHO (Geyh et al. 2011) on the conceptualiza-
tion of the personal factors component of the ICF—yielded 353 citations in 79 papers. Five
hundred and thirty-eight statements about personal factors were classified. In addition
to conceptual statements, authors have identified personal factors (Verbrugge and Jette
1994; Fougeyrollas et al. 1999; Ueda and Okawa 2003; Badley 2006; Viol et al. 2006). Authors
maintain that there is a need for standardization, pointing to “the potential of PF [per-
sonal factors] in enhancing the understanding of functioning, disability and health, in
facilitating interventions and services for people with disabilities, and strengthening the
perspective of individuals in the ICF” (Geyh et al. 2011, p. 1089). An outline list of personal
factors is already provided by the ICF and the ICF-CY: “gender, race, age, other health con-
ditions, fitness, lifestyle, habits, upbringing, coping styles, social background, education,
profession, past and current experiences, overall behavioural pattern and character style,
individual psychological assets” (WHO 2001, pp. 23-24; 2007, pp. 15-16). A more compre-
hensive list of 238 examples of personal factors not named in the ICF definition is cre-
ated by Geyh and colleagues (2011) by collecting all of those named in 23 papers of the 79
reviewed. 199 factors out of 238 are found only one time and each one just in a single paper.
Of the 39 remaining concepts, the consensus of more than five papers converges on only
three concepts: self-efficacy (13), motivation (7), and personality (7). These findings push
authors to claim “a need for further standardisation in relation to personal factors as part
of the ICF” (Geyh et al. 2011, p. 1099).
The contexts in which personal factors are most frequently mentioned are the rehabili-
tation of communication disorders and musculoskeletal conditions. In any event, there
 
Search WWH ::




Custom Search