Background: Effective management of clinical assessment tools is critical in stroke and brain injury rehabilitation research. Managing rehabilitation outcome measures (ROMs) scores and training therapists in multicenter randomized clinical trials (RCTs) is challenging. Objects: The aim of this study was to develop a web-based platform, the Korean Rehabilitation Outcome Measurement (KoROM), to address these limitations and improve both therapist training and patient involvement in the rehabilitation process. Methods: The development of the KoROM spanned from June 2021 to July 2022, and included literature and web-based searches to identify relevant ROMs and design a user-friendly platform. Feedback from six physical therapy and informatics experts during pilot testing refined the platform. Results: Several clinical assessment tools categorized under the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) model are categorized in the KoROM. The therapist version includes patient management, assessment tool information, and data downloads, while the patient version provides a simplified interface for viewing scores and printing summaries. The master version provides full access to user information and clinical assessment scores. Therapists enter clinical assessment scores into the KoROM and learn ROMs through instructional videos and self-checklists as part of the therapist standardization process. Conclusion: The KoROM is a specialized online platform that improves the management of ROMs, facilitates therapist education, and promotes patient involvement in the rehabilitation process. The KoROM can be used not only in multi-site RCTs, but also in community rehabilitation exercise centers.

Background: Outcome measures (OMs) are essential components of evidence- based practice as they help in implementing interventions and assessing changes in a patient's status before and after treatment. However, many therapists do not utilize OMs in their practice, and research on the factors that influence physical therapists' decisions regarding the use of OMs primarily consists of quantitative or survey-based studies. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to select research studies on OMs use among physical therapists through a systematic review, identify questionnaire characteristics, and assess the quality of items collection and research. Design: A systematic review. Methods: This study systematically collected survey studies on the use of OMs from five databases (KMBase, RISS, KCI, Pubmed, and Cochrane) based on the criteria of PRISMA's systematic review flowchart. The quality of the studies was assessed using the AXIS Tool. Results: A total of eight studies were selected. In most of the studies, the questionnaires were developed internally, validated through preliminary research, and reliability testing was not conducted. The items used within OMs were divided into 10 categories, with the highest frequency of questions centering around how to use OMs, and the lowest frequency regarding work environment and reasons. All eight studies were determined to be of good quality. Conclusion: The collected OMs questionnaires revealed variations in the item frequency. Future qualitative research and participant feedback are needed to develop a consistent questionnaire and validate its validity and reliability.

Background: The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) model, created by the World Health Organization, provides a theoretical framework that can be applied in the diagnosis and treatment of various disorders. Objects: Our research purposed to ascertain the relationship between structure/function, activity, and participation domain variables of the ICF and pain, pain-associated disability, activities of daily living (ADL), and quality of life in patients with chronic low back pain (LBP). Methods: Two-hundred patients with chronic LBP (mean age: 35.5 ± 8.8 years, females, n = 40) were recruited from hospital and community settings. We evaluated the body structure/ function domain variable using the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) and Roland–Morris disability (RMD) questionnaire. To evaluate the activity domain variable, we used the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (QBDS). For clinical outcome measures, we used Short-form 12 (SF-12). Pearson’s correlation coefficient was used to ascertain the relationships among the variables (p < 0.05). All the participants with LBP received 30 minutes of conventional physical therapy 3 days/week for 4 weeks. Results: There were significant correlations between the body structure/function domain (NPRS and RMD questionnaire), activity domain (ODI and QBDS), and participation domain variables (SF-12), rending from pre-intervention (r = –0.723 to 0.783) and postintervention (r = –0.742 to 0.757, p < 0.05). Conclusion: The identification of a significant difference between these domain variables point to important relationships between pain, disability, performance of ADL, and quality in participants with LBP.