| Summary: | There are many clinical and objectively defined parameters that are used to evaluate a person's disability. Since the World Health Organisation has presented the WHODAS II as a means of objectively measuring subjectively defined functions, greater attention has been focused on self-rated health. Only a few studies, however, have been conducted about differences between self-rated health and objectively defined parameters. The survey for this study was conducted on the basis of WHODAS II and the population in Latvia with spinal cord injury. Respondents were between 18 and 65, and 98 questionnaires were analysed. The results show that people with spinal cord injury on average rate their functioning as limited (33–40 points of 100). Most respondents have been declared to be disabled, which is defined as very serious or severe functional disorders. More than 40% have paid jobs, while one-third do not work for reasons of health. The research shows that there is a close coherence (p< 0.05) between individual, objectively and clinically defined indicators on the one hand and the aspects of the questionnaire in which physical functioning was an important factor on the other hand. In order to understand the real functional abilities of patients and the individual factors that influence those abilities, it is necessary to define functional self-rated health in addition to objectively defined indicators.
|
|---|
