The WhOM is a semi-structured interview/assessment focused on participation outcomes as identified by the participants. In Part I, participants identify their participation outcome goals (i.e. specific things that they want to do and achieve) at home and in the community, and they then rate the importance (Imp) of the goals and satisfaction (Sat) with their performance in reaching their goals. Part II consists of structured questions about their comfort, satisfaction with positioning, and skin breakdown.

This information is intended to be re-tested to:

  1. Monitor a participant’s performance (post-intervention or over time)
  2. Assist participants in participating fully in their lives
  3. Helping participants to choose appropriate seating equipment

ICF Domain

Participation ▶ Mobility
Participation ▶ Community
Participation ▶ Major Life Areas
Participation ▶ General Tasks
Participation ▶ Demands

Administration

Approximately 30 minutes, number of items varies based on outcomes identified by the participant

Number of Items

As determined by the participant

Equipment

None

Scoring

  • In part I, Importance (Imp) and Satisfaction (Sat) are rated (0-10) for each identified activity. Sat x Imp score (0-100) for each activity is the product of the two values. Mean Sat and mean Sat x Imp scores are the means of the respective activity scores.
  • In part II, change (post-pre) scores can be calculated.

Languages

Available in English, French, Farsi, Hebrew, and Italian

Training Required

None, however good clinical interviewing skills are essential.

Availability

The WhOM worksheet can be found here (registration required).

Measurement Property Summary

Number of studies reporting psychometric properties: 4

Interpretability

  • MCID: not established in SCI
  • SEM:
    • Mean Satisfaction: 0.43-0.58
    • Mean Satisfaction x Importance: 5.42-5.87
  • MDC:
    • Mean Satisfaction: 1.19-1.61
    • Mean Satisfaction x Importance: 15.02-16.27

(Miller et al. 2011; N=50, 42 male, mixed injury types, mean (SD) time post-SCI = 16.1 (10.1) years)

Reliability – High

Number of studies reporting reliability data: 3

  • High test-retest reliability:
    • WhOM – Sat: Intraclass Correlation Coefficient=0.90)
    • WhOM – Sat x Imp: ICC=0.93
    • WhOM – Body Function: ICC=0.83

(Alimohammad et al., 2016; N=75; no info on injury type; Farsi speakers, wheelchair as primary mobility device; mean (SD) time post-SCI = 60 (61) months)

  • High inter-rater reliability: ICC=0.99

(Alimohammad et al., 2016; N=75; no info on injury type; Farsi speakers, wheelchair as primary mobility device; mean (SD) time post-SCI = 60 (61) months)

Validity – Low to High

Number of studies reporting validity data: 4

  • Moderate correlations with the Spinal Cord Independence Measure (SCIM-III):
    • WhOM mean Sat: 0.338
    • WhOM mean Sat x Imp: 0.507
  • Low correlations with the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II):
    • WhOM mean Sat: -0.220
    • WhOM mean Sat x Imp: -0.262

(Alimohammad et al., 2016; N=75 with SCI; no info on injury type; Farsi speakers, wheelchair as primary mobility device; mean (SD) time post-SCI = 60 (61) months)

  • Low to High correlations with the Assessment of Life Habits (LIFE-H):
    • WhOM mean Sat: 0.18-0.62
    • WhOM Sat x Imp: 0.16-0.55

(Miller et al., 2011; N=50, 42 male, mixed injury types, mean (SD) time post-SCI = 16.1 (10.1) years)

Responsiveness

No values were reported for the responsiveness of the WhOM for the SCI population.

Floor/Ceiling Effect:

Ceiling effect reported for mean WhOM – Sat in home activities (22%). No ceiling or floor effect detected in all other scores.

(Alimohammad et al., 2016; N=75; no info on injury type; Farsi speakers, wheelchair as primary mobility device; mean (SD) time post-SCI = 60 (61) months)

Reviewers

Dr. Carlos L. Cano-Herrera, Elsa Sun

Date Last Updated

December 31, 2024

Auger C, Demers L, Gélinas I, Routhier F, Mortenson WB, Miller WC. Reliability and Validity of the Telephone Administration of the Wheelchair Outcome Measure (WhOM) for Middle-Aged and Older Users of Power Mobility Devices. J Rehabil Med. 2010 Jun;42(6):574-81.

Miller WC, Garden J, Mortenson WB. Measurement properties of the wheelchair outcome measure in individuals with spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 2011 Sep; 49(9): 995-1000. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21577219

Mortenson WB, Miller WC, Miller-Polgar J. Measuring wheelchair intervention outcomes: development of the wheelchair outcome measure. Disabil Rehabil 2007; 2: 275–285. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17483100701475863?journalCode=iidt20

Garden, J. A. (2009). Reliability and validity of the Wheelchair Outcome Measure (T). University of British Columbia. Retrieved from https://open.library.ubc.ca/cIRcle/collections/24/items/1.0067673 (Original work published 2009)

Parvaneh S, Mortenson WB, Miller WC. doi: 10.3109/17483107.2013.769126. Validating the wheelchair outcome measure for residents in long-term care. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2014 May;9(3):209-12.

Alimohammad S, Parvaneh S, Ghahari S, Saberi H, Yekaninejad MS, Miller WC. Translation and validation of the Farsi version of the Wheelchair Outcome Measure (WhOM-Farsi) in individuals with spinal cord injury. Disabil Health J. 2016 Apr;9(2):265-71.

Related Downloads