A European Academy of Rehabilitation Medicine Academic Debate: Describing Experienced Health on the Basis of the WHO's Model of Functioning (ICF) or on the Theory of Social Productivity

• Main Authors: Carlotte Kiekens, Jean-Pierre Didier, Antti Malmivaara, Stefano Negrini, Christoph Gutenbrunner
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Foundation for Rehabilitation Information 2019-03-01
• Series: Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine
• Subjects: rehabilitation; International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health; well-being; social productivity.
• Online Access: https://www.medicaljournals.se/jrm/content/html/10.2340/16501977-2533
• ISSN: 1650-1977; 1651-2081

The first Academic Debate was held within the European Academy of Rehabilitation Medicine (EARM) in Budapest in 2016. The question debated was: is it possible to provide a theory neutral framework to describe the lived experience of health or is there an appropriate theory to understand what constitute the most relevant factors in health (and well-being). First the link between the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) and rehabilitation as a key health strategy was explained. It was then argued that supplementing the ICF by theory-based approaches (e.g. a theory of social productivity) may advance explanations with regard to participation and links with health and well-being. Thirdly, it was recalled that one of the strengths of the ICF is exactly being “theory neutral”. There was no doubt that there is a need for scientific theories to describe functioning and health. The theory of social productivity seems to be an important contribution towards this goal. However, the definition of well-being in relation to the operationalization of functioning and health needs to be further developed. The conclusion cannot be an “either-or” (classification vs theory). Projects should be set up both to further develop the ICF and to refine (or develop new) theories.