uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Simplified bipartite concepts of functioning and disability recommended for interdisciplinary use of the ICF.
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Medicinska och farmaceutiska vetenskapsområdet, centrumbildningar mm, Centre for Research and Development, Gävleborg.
2015 (English)In: Disability and Rehabilitation, ISSN 0963-8288, E-ISSN 1464-5165, Vol. 37, no 9, 1783-1792 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Abstract Purpose: To argue for and propose bipartite concepts of functioning and disability, to tally with the structure of the ICF classification list, concepts of social models and clinical needs. Method: The ICF concepts are discussed in relation to the history of ideas regarding disability concepts and the needs for such concepts in interdisciplinary rehabilitation. Results: Bipartite concepts are presented; they refer to actual functioning, simply body functions/structures and participation, including functioning in standardized environments. Participation refers to actually performed "activities", with "activities" simply denoting things that people may do. Bipartite concepts are congruent with the ICF classification and the structure of social models of disability, suitable for clinical and interdisciplinary use and easy to understand. The issue of standardized environments represents a methodological issue rather than the conceptual issue of defining functioning and disability. An individual perspective on activity and activity limitations, i.e. the middle part of the tripartite ICF concept, is somewhat similar to concepts of traditional language that were regarded as too generalizing already in 1912, when the interactional concept of "disability in a social sense" was introduced in rehabilitation practices. Conclusion: Bipartite concepts of functioning and disability are recommended for interdisciplinary use of the ICF. Implications for Rehabilitation The ICF classification is useful, but the ICF concept of activities in an individual perspective is confusing. We suggest a use of the term "activities" simply to denote things that people may do and "participation" to denote actually performed activities. Estimations of ability should be explicit about how they are related to environmental factors.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2015. Vol. 37, no 9, 1783-1792 p.
National Category
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-237495DOI: 10.3109/09638288.2014.978506ISI: 000359878700023PubMedID: 25365700OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-237495DiVA: diva2:768116
Available from: 2014-12-03 Created: 2014-12-03 Last updated: 2015-09-21Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed
By organisation
Centre for Research and Development, Gävleborg
In the same journal
Disability and Rehabilitation

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 171 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link