Skip to main content

Table 1 Mini-ICF-APP ratings of claimants with different psychiatric diagnoses

From: The assessment of capacity limitations in psychiatric work disability evaluations by the social functioning scale Mini-ICF-APP

 

a) F30-F39

Mood disorders

b) F40-F48

Neurotic disorders

c) F60-F69

Personality disorders

Effects of diagnosis

Total N

359

347

142

 

Female/male

192/167

218/129

80/62

Χ2 = 6.459, P = 0.040

Mean age

50.1 (7.7)

48.9 (8.5)

47.4 (8.8)

F = 6.037, P = 0.002

a > c

(1) adherence to regulations

1.39 (0.92)

1.15 (0.91)

1.84 (0.96)

F = 28.588, P < 0.001

c > a > b

(2) planning and structuring of tasks

1.56 (0.88)

1.21 (0.90)

1.52 (0.94)

F = 14.191, P < 0.001

c, a > b

(3) flexibility

2.04 (0.72)

1.72 (0.88)

2.29 (0.79)

F = 29.725, P < 0.001

c > a > b

(4) applying expertise

1.33 (0.85)

1.14 (0.92)

1.44 (1.01)

F = 6.995, P = 0.001

c, a > b

(5) competence to judge and decide

1.59 (0.96)

1.19 (0.93)

1.35 (1.08)

F = 14.708, P < 0.001

a > b

(6) endurance

2.19 (0.67)

2.11 (0.73)

2.34 (0.84)

F = 5.255, P = 0.005

c > b

(7) assertiveness

1.85 (0.82)

1.37 (0.93)

1.85 (0.90)

F = 30.595, P < 0.001

c, a > b

(8) contact with others

1.39 (0.86)

1.03 (0.84)

1.98 (0.88)

F = 63.462, P < 0.001

c > a > b

(9) group integration

1.39 (0.89)

1.18 (0.89)

2.26 (0.80)

F = 78.300, P < 0.001

c > a > b

(10) intimate relationships

1.29 (0.84)

1.07 (0.91)

1.78 (0.91)

F = 32.380, P < 0.001

c > a > b

(11) non-work activities

1.57 (0.84)

1.45 (0.82)

1.83 (0.90)

F = 10.420, P < 0.001

c > a, b

(12) self-care

0.29 (0.59)

0.23 (0.53)

0.42 (0.68)

F = 5.294, P = 0.005

c > b

(13) mobility

0.81 (0.96)

0.75 (0.87)

0.71 (0.94)

F = 0.730, n.s.

MICFmean

1.44 (0.59)

1.20 (0.57)

1.66 (0.55)

F = 36.087, P < 0.001

c > a > b

MICFtotal

18.7 (7.6)

15.6 (7.5)

21.6 (7.2)

 

RWC ≤ 30%

20.2%

16.2%

45.7%

Χ2 = 56.218, P < 0.001

RWC > 30, < 70%

45.7%

44.8%

37.1%

 

RWC ≥70%

34.2%

39.0%

17.1%

 
  1. The right column (‘Effects of Diagnosis’) shows the results of the statistical comparison between the three sub-samples, with significant post-hoc tests indexed by greater-than signs. The three top rows display the number of claimants in each sub-sample (N), the number of female and male claimants, and the mean age. The following rows show the Mini-ICF-APP ratings in each capacity domain, as well as the two global capacity ratings (MICFmean and MICFtotal). The numbers in parentheses refer to the standard deviations (SDs). The bottom row lists the percentage of claimants with low, moderate, and high RWC in an alternative job. RWC estimates of six claimants were missing. Claimants with personality disorders had the highest MICFmean as well as the highest percentage of claimants with low RWC