Rehab Measures Database
  1. Rehabilitation Measures Database
  2. Wheelchair Outcome Measure (WhOM)

Wheelchair Outcome Measure (WhOM)

Last Updated

Purpose

To measure wheelchair users' satisfaction and importance of participation in self-identified activities inside and outside the home, and body functions related to wheelchair use.

Acronym WhOM

Area of Assessment

Activities & Participation
Bodily Functions

Administration Mode

Paper & Pencil

Cost

Free

CDE Status

Not a CDE--last searched 4/29/2025

Populations

Spinal Cord Injuries
Mixed Conditions

Key Descriptions

  • Part I: Participation - identifies 5 activities inside the home and 5 activities outside the home, rated for importance (0–10) and satisfaction (0–10).
  • Part II: Body Function - assesses comfort, body positioning, and skin integrity.

Number of Items

- 10 participation activities (5 inside, 5 outside)
- 3 body function questions

Equipment Required

  • Paper, Pen, Telephone (if administered by phone)

Time to Administer

10-15 minutes

In-person or telephone administration

Required Training

Reading an Article/Manual

Required Training Description

Familiarity with semi-structured interviewing techniques; no formal certification required.

Age Ranges

Child

11 - 12

years

Adolescent

13 - 17

years

Adult

18 - 64

years

Elderly Adult

65 +

years

Instrument Reviewers

Initially reviewed on 4/29/2025 by Francesca Kaspar, PT, DPT, and Brooke Pantano, PT, DPT, Kessler Institute for Rehabilitation, Neuro Residency Program.

Body Structure

Head
Neck
Upper Extremity
Back
Lower Extremity

ICF Domain

Participation
Body Function

Measurement Domain

Activities of Daily Living
Motor
Sensory

Professional Association Recommendation

None found--last searched 4/29/2025

Considerations

- Applicable to manual and power wheelchair users.

- Suitable for individuals with SCI, older adults, adolescents, and long-term care residents.

- Proxy administration validated for individuals unable to self-report.

- Versions available in English, French, and Farsi.

- Visual aids beneficial for younger populations (WhOM-YP).

 

Spinal Cord Injuries

back to Populations

Standard Error of Measurement (SEM)

Adults with SCI: (Miller et al., 2011; n = 50; mean age = 43.7 (10.7) years, mean time since injury = 16.1 (10.1) years)

  • SEM for Satisfaction score = 0.58
  • MDC for Satisfaction x Importance score = 5.87 

 

Minimal Detectable Change (MDC)

Adults with SCI: (Miller et al., 2011)

  • MDC for Satisfaction score = 1.6
  • MDC for Satisfaction x Importance score = 16.3

 

Test/Retest Reliability

Adults with SCI: (Miller et al, 2011; test-retest interval = 1 week)

  • Adequate test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.83) for Satisfaction and (0.88) for Satisfaction x Importance scores respectively

 

Farsi-speaking SCI patients: (Alimohammad et al, 2016; n = 75, mean age = 31.9 (9.5) years, mean duration of injury = 59.8 (60.8) months, test-retest inverval = 14 days, Farsi translation of WhOM)

  • Excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.91) for Mean Satisfaction and (0.93) for Mean Satisfaction x Importance scores, respectively
  • Adequate test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.83) for Mean Body function scores

 

Interrater/Intrarater Reliability

Adults with SCI: (Miller et al, 2011)

  • Excellent inter-rater reliability (ICC = 0.91) for Satisfaction and (0.90) for Satisfaction x Importance scores, respectively

 

Farsi-speaking SCI patients: (Alimohammad et al, 2016)

  • Excellent inter-rater reliability for Mean Satisfaction, Satisfaction x Importance, and Body function scores (ICC = 0.99 for each)

 

Construct Validity

Convergent validity:

Adults with SCI: (Miller et al, 2011)

  • Excellent correlation between WhOM Mean Satisfaction score and LIFE-H Employment item “Eating and moving around in your place of occupation” (r = 0.62)
  • Poor to Adequate correlations between Whom Mean Satisfaction and Mean Satisfaction x Importance scores and other LIFE-H items (r = 0.16-0.56)

 

Farsi-speaking SCI patients: (Alimohammad et al, 2016)

  • Adequate correlation of WhOM-Farsi with Spinal Cord Independence Measure-III (SCIM-III) (r = 0.31-0.51)
  • Poor correlation of WhOM-Farsi with Physical Component Summary (PCS) (r = 0.14-0.30) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) (r = -0.04-0.24) scores of the Short Form Health Survey-12 (SF-12)

 

Mixed Conditions

back to Populations

Standard Error of Measurement (SEM)

Long term care residents: (Parvaneh et al, 2014; n = 55; age > 60, mean age = 84 (8.4) years, female = 67%)

  • SEM for Mean Satisfaction score = 1.04
  • SEM for Mean Importance x Satisfaction score =  8.65

Adolescent Wheelchair Users: (Field et al., 2022; (Parent sample age (count): 19-29 years (n = 2), 30-39 years (n = 10), 40-49 years (n = 15), 50-59 years (n = 5), parent sex female = 25); (Child sample age (count): 5-7 years (n = 7), 8-10 years (n = 6), 11-13 years (n = 6), 14-17 years (n = 13), child sex female = 13))

Ages 5-17 

  • SEM for Mean Satisfaction score (n = 24) = 1.75 for inside participation for Mean Importance
  • SEM for Mean Importance score (n = 24) is NS for inside participation
  • SEM for Mean Importance x Satisfaction score (n = 24) =  16.85 for inside participation
  • SEM for Mean Importance score (n = 24) = 0.72 for outside participation
  • SEM for Mean Satisfaction score (n = 28) = 0.84 for outside participation
  • SEM for Mean Importance x Satisfaction score (n = 28) = 7.30 for outside participation 

Ages 8-17

  • SEM for Mean Importance score (n = 18) = 1.04 for inside participation
  • SEM for Mean Satisfaction score (n = 18)  = 1.25 for inside participation
  • SEM for Mean Importance x Satisfaction score (n = 18) = 10.29 for inside participation
  • SEM for Mean importance score (n = 18) is NS for outside participation
  • SEM for Mean Satisfaction score (n = 22) = 0.89 for outside participation
  • SEM for Mean Importance x Satisfaction score (n = 22) = 6.41 for outside participation 

Parents 

  • SEM for Mean Satisfaction score (n = 10) = 1.15 for inside participation
  • SEM for Mean Importance score (n = 10) is NS for inside participation
  • SEM for Mean Importance x Satisfaction score (n = 10) = 9.63 for inside participation
  • SEM for Mean Importance score (n = 10) is NS for outside participation
  • SEM for Mean Satisfaction score (n = 12) = 0.65 for outside participation
  • SEM for Mean Importance x Satisfaction score (n = 12) = 6.22 for outside participation

 

Minimal Detectable Change (MDC)

Long term care residents: (Parvaneh et al, 2014)

  • MDC for Satisfaction score = 2.90
  • MDC for Importance x Satisfaction score =  23.96

Adolescent Wheelchair Users: (Field et al., 2022; MDD = Minimal Detectable Difference)

Ages 5-17

  • MDD for Mean Satisfaction score (n = 24) = 4.83 for inside participation
  • MDD for Mean importance score (n = 24) is NS for inside participation
  • MDD for Mean Importance x Satisfaction score (n = 24) = 46.51 for inside participation
  • MDD for Mean Importance score (n = 24) = 1.99 for outside participation
  • MDD for Mean Satisfaction score (n = 28) = 2.32 for outside participation
  • MDD for Mean Importance x Satisfaction score (n = 28) = 20.15 for outside participation 

Ages 8-17

  • MDD for Mean Importance score (n = 18) = 2.87 for inside participation
  • MDD for Mean Satisfaction score (n = 18) = 3.45 for inside participation
  • MDD for Mean Importance x Satisfaction score (n = 18) = 28.40 for inside participation
  • MDD for Mean Importance score (n = 18) is NS for outside participation
  • MDD for Mean Satisfaction score (n = 22) = 2.46 for outside participation
  • MDD for Mean Importance x Satisfaction score (n = 22) = 17.69 for outside participation 

Parents 

  • MDD for Mean Satisfaction score (n = 10) = 3.17 for inside participation
  • MDD for Mean Importance score (n = 10) is NS for inside participation
  • MDD for Mean Importance x Satisfaction score (n = 10) = 26.58 for inside participation
  • MDD for Mean Importance score (n = 10) is NS for outside participation
  • MDD for Mean Satisfaction score (n = 12) = 1.79 for outside participation
  • MDD for Mean Importance x Satisfaction score (n = 12) = 17.17 for outside participation 

 

Test/Retest Reliability

Long term care residents: (Parvaneh et al., 2014, mean test-retest interval = 13.8 days)

  • Adequate test-retest reliability for Mean Importance x Satisfaction (ICC = 0.82)
  • Poor test-retest reliability for Mean Satisfaction (ICC = 0.67)

Power mobility users aged 50+: (Auger et al., 2010; n = 40, female = 23 (57.5%), mean time using powered mobility device = 7.7 (3.1) months, test-retest interval = two weeks, French translation of WhOM)

  • Excellent test-retest reliability for Total Importance x Satisfaction (ICC = 0.92), Total Satisfaction (ICC = 0.91), and Skin Condition scores (ICC = 1.00)
  • Adequate test-retest reliability for Mean Importance x Satisfaction (ICC = 0.89), Mean Satisfaction (ICC = 0.79), Comfort (ICC = 0.85), and Position (ICC = 0.77)

Adolescent Wheelchair Users: (Field et al., 2022)

Ages 5-17: ICC [95% CI]

  • Excellent test retest reliability (ICC = 0.93 [0.85, 0.97]) for Mean Satisfaction and (0.94 [0.88, 0.97]) for Importance x Satisfaction within Outside Participation
  • Adequate test retest reliability (ICC = 0.57 [0.24, 0.79]) for Mean Satisfaction within Inside Participation subgroup and (0.63 [0.33, 0.82] and 0.48 [0.14, 0.72]) for Importance x Satisfaction within Inside Participation and Mean Importance within Outside Participation, respectively
  • Poor test retest reliability (ICC = 0.33 [-0.07, 0.64]) for Mean Importance within Inside Participation 

Ages 8-17: ICC [95% CI]

  • Excellent test retest reliability (ICC = 0.91 [0.79, 0.96]) for Mean Satisfaction and (0.92 [0.81, 0.97]) for Importance x Satisfaction within Outside Participation
  • Adequate test retest reliability (ICC = 0.61 [0.21, 0.84]) for Mean Importance within inside participation subgroup and (0.80 [0.55, 0.92], 0.85 [0.65, 0.94], and 0.56 [0.19, 0.78]) for Mean Satisfaction and Importance x Satisfaction within inside participation and Mean Importance for outside participation, respectively

Parents: ICC [95% CI]

  • Excellent test retest reliability (ICC = 0.95 [0.84, 0.99]) for Mean satisfaction and (0.95 [0.85, 0.99]) for Importance x Satisfaction within outside participation subgroups
  • Adequate test retest reliability (ICC = 0.85 [0.48, 0.96]) for Mean Satisfaction and (0.89 [0.61, 0.97]) for Importance x Satisfaction within inside participation subgroup
  • Poor test retest reliability (ICC = 0.37 [-0.28, 0.79]) for Mean Importance for inside participation subgroup and (0.12 [-0.28, 0.58]) for Mean Importance within outside participation subgroup

 

Construct Validity

Convergent validity:

Long term care residents: (Parvaneh et al., 2014)

  • Adequate correlations between the Mean Importance x Satisfaction measure for the WhOM Total (n = 55) and Self-respondent (n = 38) groups and the Late Life Function and Disability Instrument (LLDI) of r = 0.42 and 0.50, respectively (p ≤ 0.05).

Power mobility users aged 50+: (Auger et al., 2010; n = 74)

  • Adequate correlation of WhOM Part I: Participation Mean Importance x Satisfaction and Mean Satisfaction with Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Technology questionnaire (QUEST 2.0) (r = 0.36-0.46)
  • Poor correlation of WhOM Part I: Participation Total Importance x Satisfaction and Total Satisfaction with QUEST 2.0 (r = 0.01-0.24)
  • Adequate correlation of WhOM Part I: Participation Mean Importance x Satisfaction, Mean Satisfaction, and Total Importance x Satisfaction with Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Devices Scale (PIADS) (r = 0.31-0.43)
  • Poor correlation of WhOM Part I: Participation Total Satisfaction with (PIADS) (r = 0.21)

Adolescent Wheelchair Users: (Field et al., 2022)

  • Excellent correlation between WhOM-YP child vs parent mean weighted satisfaction scores for inside participation (r = 0.75, p < 0.01, n = 12) and outside participation (r = 0.79, p < 0.001, n = 14)

     

Discriminant validity:

Power mobility users aged 50+: (Auger et al., 2010; n = 74)

  • Significant differences among all WhOM scores based on duration of use between wait-list and initial users and wait-list and long-term users (p < 0.001 for both), with higher scores associated with longer use.
  • Significantly higher total WhOM scores for Powered Wheelchair Users vs. Scooter Users for Total Importance x Satisfaction (p < .05) and Total Satisfaction (p < .01)
  • Significantly higher WhOM scores for Powered Wheelchair Users vs. Scooter Users at Home for both total (Total Importance x Satisfaction and Total Satisfaction) and mean (Mean Importance x Satisfaction and Mean Satisfaction) scores (p < .001)

Adolescent Wheelchair Users: (Field et al., 2022)

  • Significant difference between mean satisfaction outside participation scores noted (p < 0.0001) for experienced (median: 74.2, n = 22) vs inexperienced (median: 32.9, n = 10) power wheelchair users 

 

Bibliography

Alimohammad, S., Parvaneh, S., Ghahari, S., Saberi, H., Yekaninejad, M. S., & Miller, W. C. (2016). Translation and validation of the Farsi version of the Wheelchair Outcome Measure (WhOM-Farsi) in individuals with spinal cord injury. Disability and Health Journal, 9(2), 265-271.

Auger, C., Demers, L., Gélinas, I., Routhier, F., Mortenson, W. B., & Miller, W. C. (2010). Reliability and validity of the telephone administration of the wheelchair outcome measure (WhOM) for middle-aged and older users of power mobility devices. Journal of rehabilitation medicine, 42(6), 574.

Field, D. A., & Miller, W. C. (2022). The Wheelchair Outcome Measure for Young People (WhOM-YP): modification and metrics for children and youth with mobility limitations. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 17(2), 192-200.

Miller, W. C., Garden, J., & Mortenson, W. B. (2011). Measurement properties of the wheelchair outcome measure in individuals with spinal cord injury. Spinal cord, 49(9), 995-1000.

Parvaneh, S., Mortenson, W. B., & Miller, W. C. (2014). Validating the wheelchair outcome measure for residents in long-term care. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 9(3), 209-212.

 

rehabilitation measures

More Instruments Like This

We have reviewed more than 500 instruments for use with a number of diagnoses including stroke, spinal cord injury and traumatic brain injury among several others.

updated Jun 11, 2025

StepWatch

read more

updated May 10, 2025

Physical Activity Enjoymen...

read more

updated Apr 24, 2025

Rapid Assessment of Physic...

read more