English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  Although participation is a core concept in multiple models of disability, there is no consensus on its definition. Objective  The aim of this study was to extract participation domains based on review of theories, available outcome measures, and interviews with experts and the person with hand injuries to compare with the ICF domains of participation. Methods  A qualitative approach using a deductive content analysis was employed to extend definitions of participation from theories. Later on, inductive qualitative method using semistructured interview with five experts in different fields and 30 patients with different hand injuries was used. Coding was performed with extracted domains from the content of data, and finally, the extracted domains were compared with the ICF domains of participation. Results  Some of the extracted domains were not considered in ICF. Conclusion  Subjective participation is the main forbearance part. Role, leisure, domestic life, environment, and others are also main missing meanings. This limitation can hinder measuring disability and health.

Are the Domains Considered by ICF Comprehensive Enough to Conceptualize Participation in the Patient with Hand Injuries?