Detection of activities of daily living impairment in Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment using information and communication technology

Guillaume Sacco, Véronique Joumier, Nelly Darmon, Arnaud Dechamps, Alexandre Derreumaux, Ji-Hyun Lee, Julie Piano, Nathalie Bordone, Alexandra Konig, Bernard Teboul, Renaud David, Olivier Guerin, François Bremond, Philippe Robert, Guillaume Sacco, Véronique Joumier, Nelly Darmon, Arnaud Dechamps, Alexandre Derreumaux, Ji-Hyun Lee, Julie Piano, Nathalie Bordone, Alexandra Konig, Bernard Teboul, Renaud David, Olivier Guerin, François Bremond, Philippe Robert

Abstract

Background: One of the key clinical features of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is impairment in daily functioning. Patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) also commonly have mild problems performing complex tasks. Information and communication technology (ICT), particularly techniques involving imaging and video processing, is of interest in order to improve assessment. The overall aim of this study is to demonstrate that it is possible using a video monitoring system to obtain a quantifiable assessment of instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs) in AD and in MCI.

Methods: The aim of the study is to propose a daily activity scenario (DAS) score that detects functional impairment using ICTs in AD and MCI compared with normal control group (NC). Sixty-four participants over 65 years old were included: 16 AD matched with 10 NC for protocol 1 (P1) and 19 MCI matched with 19 NC for protocol 2 (P2). Each participant was asked to undertake a set of daily tasks in the setting of a "smart home" equipped with two video cameras and everyday objects for use in activities of daily living (8 IADLs for P1 and 11 for P2, plus 4 temporal execution constraints). The DAS score was then computed from quantitative and qualitative parameters collected from video recordings.

Results: In P1, the DAS score differentiated AD (DAS(AD,P1) = 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38-0.56) from NC (DAS(NC,P1) = 0.71, 95% CI 0.68-0.74). In P2, the DAS score differentiated MCI (DAS(MCI,P2) = 0.11, 95% CI 0.05-0.16) and NC (DAS(NC,P2) = 0.36, 95% CI 0.26-0.45).

Conclusion: In conclusion, this study outlines the interest of a novel tool coming from the ICT world for the assessment of functional impairment in AD and MCI. The derived DAS scores provide a pragmatic, ecological, objective measurement which may improve the prediction of future dementia, be used as an outcome measurement in clinical trials and lead to earlier therapeutic intervention.

Keywords: IADL; ICT; MCI; functional impairment.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
DAS.,P1 scores for AD patients and NC participants for protocol 1 (P1). The first line (A) represents the ratio of efficacy for the two groups (Grey dots for NC and Black dots for AD). Then the next lines (B–E) show the evolution of the index from ratio of efficacy (index 0) to DAS.,P1 score (index 4) including omission (B), repetition (C), order error (D), and bad completion at the first attempt (E). Measurements represented for each participant j: (A) REff = Index0,P1(j) (Percentage of time spent in the room to behave directed to perform a listed activities). (B) Index1,P1(j)=[REff(j)]×∏i=14k1,P1a1,F (impact of omission mistakes on the REff). (C) Index2,P1(j)=[REff(j)]×∏i=14k1,P1a1,F1(j) (cumulative impact of omission and repetition mistakes on the REff). (D) Index3,P1(j)=[REff(j)]×∏i=12k1,P2a1,F2(j) (cumulative impact of omission, repetition, and order mistakes on the REff). (E) Final DAS score Sj,P1(k1,P1, k2,P1, k3,P1, k4,P1,) (j)=[REff(j)]×∏i=14k1,P1a1,F1 (j) (cumulative impact of omission, repetition, order mistakes, and bad completion at the first attempt on the REff).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Performance evaluation of the assessment methodology to classify observation data as AD group or NC group. (A) Specificity and sensitivity in function of the cutoff point of DAS.,P1() scores. (B) Receiver operating curve associated with protocol 1. Abbreviations: AD, Alzheimer’s disease; DAS, daily activity scenario; NC, normal control.
Figure 3
Figure 3
DAS.,P2 scores for MCI patients and NC participants for protocol 2 (P2). The first line (A) represents the ratio of efficacy for the two groups (Grey dots for NC and Black dots for MCI). Then the next lines (B–E) show the evolution of the index from ratio of efficacy (index 0) to DAS.,P2 score (index 4) including omission (B), repetition (C), bad achievement of activities (D), and planning errors (E). Measurements represented for each participant j: (A) REff = Index0,P2 (j) (Percentage of time spent in the room to behave directed to perform a listed activities). (B) Index1,P2(j)=[REff(j)]×k1,P2α1,F2 (j) (impact of omission mistakes on the REff). (C) Index2,P2(j)=[REff(j)]×∏i=12k1,P2a1,F2 (j) (cumulative impact of omission and repetition (excluding repetition of leisure activities) mistakes on the REff). (D) Index3,P2(j)=[REff(j)]×∏i=13k1,P2a1,F2 (j) (cumulative impact of omission, repetition (excluding repetition of leisure activities) mistakes and bad achievement of activities on the REff). (E) Final DAS score Sj,P2 (k1,P2, k2,P2, k3,P2, k4,P2,) (j)=[REff(j)]×∏i=14k1,P2a1,F2 (j) (cumulative impact of omission, repetition (excluding repetition of leisure activities) mistakes, bad achievements of activities, and planification mistakes on the REff).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Performance evaluation of the assessment methodology to classify observation data as MCI group or NC group. (A) Specificity and sensitivity in function of the cutoff point of DAS.,P2() scores. (B) Receiver operating curve associated with the protocol 2. Abbreviations: DAS, daily activity scenario; MCI, mild cognitive impairment; NC, normal control.

References

    1. Katz S, Ford AB, Moskowitz RW, Jackson BA, Jaffe MW. Studies of illness in the aged. The Index of ADL: a standardized measure of biological and psychosocial function. JAMA. 1963;185:914–919.
    1. Lawton MP, Brody EM. Assessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist. 1969;9(3):179–186.
    1. Andersen CK, Wittrup-Jensen KU, Lolk A, Andersen K, Kragh-Sorensen P. Ability to perform activities of daily living is the main factor affecting quality of life in patients with dementia. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2004;2:52.
    1. Petersen RC, Smith GE, Waring SC, Ivnik RJ, Tangalos EG, Kokmen E. Mild cognitive impairment: clinical characterization and outcome. Arch Neurol. 1999;56(3):303–308.
    1. Morris JC, Cummings J. Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) represents early-stage Alzheimer’s disease. J Alzheimers Dis. 2005;7(3):235–239.
    1. Tuokko H, Morris C, Ebert P. Mild cognitive impairment and everyday functioning in older adults. Neurocase. 2005;11(1):40–47.
    1. Artero S, Petersen R, Touchon J, Ritchie K. Revised criteria for mild cognitive impairment: validation within a longitudinal population study. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2006;22(5–6):465–470.
    1. Farias ST, Mungas D, Reed BR, Harvey D, Cahn-Weiner D, Decarli C. MCI is associated with deficits in everyday functioning. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. 2006;20(4):217–223.
    1. Jefferson AL, Lambe S, Moser DJ, Byerly LK, Ozonoff A, Karlawish JH. Decisional capacity for research participation in individuals with mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2008;56(7):1236–1243.
    1. Albert MS, DeKosky ST, Dickson D, et al. The diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer’s disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2011;7(3):270–279.
    1. Sikkes SA, Visser PJ, Knol DL, et al. Do instrumental activities of daily living predict dementia at 1- and 2-year follow-up? Findings from the Development of Screening guidelines and diagnostic Criteria for Predementia Alzheimer’s disease study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2011;59(12):2273–2281.
    1. Romdhane R, Mulin E, Derreumeaux A, et al. Automatic video monitoring system for assessment of Alzheimer’s disease symptoms. J Nutr Health Aging. 2012;16(3):213–218.
    1. Alzheimer Plan 2008–2012. [Accessed September 14, 2012]. [homepage on the Internet]. Available from: .
    1. McKhann G, Drachman D, Folstein M, Katzman R, Price D, Stadlan EM. Clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease: report of the NINCDS-ADRDA Work Group under the auspices of Department of Health and Human Services. Task Force on Alzheimer’s Disease. Neurology. 1984;34(7):939–944.
    1. Goetz CG, Tilley BC, Shaftman SR, et al. Movement Disorder Society-sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS): scale presentation and clinimetric testing results. Mov Disord. 2008;23(15):2129–2170.
    1. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res. 1975;12(3):189–198.
    1. Dubois B, Slachevsky A, Litvan I, Pillon B. The FAB: a Frontal Assessment Battery at bedside. Neurology. 2000;55(11):1621–1626.
    1. Dubois B, Touchon J, Portet F, Ousset PJ, Vellas B, Michel B. “The 5 words”: a simple and sensitive test for the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Presse Med. 2002;31(36):1696–1699.
    1. Sunderland T, Hill JL, Mellow AM, et al. Clock drawing in Alzheimer’s disease. A novel measure of dementia severity. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1989;37(8):725–729.
    1. Alberca R, Salas D, Perez-Gil JA, Lozano P, Gil-Neciga E. Verbal fluency and Alzheimer’s disease. Neurologia. 1999;14(7):344–348.
    1. Montgomery SA, Asberg M. A new depression scale designed to be sensitive to change. Br J Psychiatry. 1979;134:382–389.
    1. Yesavage JA, Brink TL, Rose TL, et al. Development and validation of a geriatric depression screening scale: a preliminary report. J Psychiatr Res. 1982;17(1):37–49.
    1. Mathuranath PS, George A, Cherian PJ, Mathew R, Sarma PS. Instrumental activities of daily living scale for dementia screening in elderly people. Int Psychogeriatr. 2005;17(3):461–474.
    1. Efron B, Gong G. A leisurely look at the bootstrap, the jackknife, and cross-validation. Am Stat. 1983;37(1):36–48.
    1. Marshall GA, Rentz DM, Frey MT, Locascio JJ, Johnson KA, Sperling RA. Executive function and instrumental activities of daily living in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2011;7(3):300–308.
    1. Razani J, Casas R, Wong JT, Lu P, Alessi C, Josephson K. Relationship between executive functioning and activities of daily living in patients with relatively mild dementia. Appl Neuropsychol. 2007;14(3):208–214.
    1. Esposito F, Rochat L, Van der Linden AC, et al. Apathy and executive dysfunction in Alzheimer disease. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord. 2010;24(2):131–137.
    1. Dechamps A, Fasotti L, Jungheim J, et al. Effects of different learning methods for instrumental activities of daily living in patients with Alzheimer’s dementia: a pilot study. Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen. 2011;26(4):273–281.
    1. Luck T, Luppa M, Wiese B, et al. Prediction of incident dementia: impact of impairment in instrumental activities of daily living and mild cognitive impairment – results from the German Study on Ageing, Cognition, and Dementia in Primary Care Patients. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. Epub June 14, 2012.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbejdspartnere

Medicinske tilstande

Narkotikainterventioner

3
Abonner