Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Amsterdam Instrumental Activities of Daily Living questionnaire short version German for Switzerland

Marina Bruderer-Hofstetter, Mark A Dubbelman, André Meichtry, Florian Koehn, Thomas Münzer, Roos J Jutten, Philip Scheltens, Sietske A M Sikkes, Karin Niedermann, Marina Bruderer-Hofstetter, Mark A Dubbelman, André Meichtry, Florian Koehn, Thomas Münzer, Roos J Jutten, Philip Scheltens, Sietske A M Sikkes, Karin Niedermann

Abstract

Background: Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) limitations are associated with reduced health-related quality of life for people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). For these people, the assessment of IADL is crucial to the diagnostic process, as well as for the evaluation of new interventions addressing MCI. The Amsterdam IADL Questionnaire Short Version (A-IADL-Q-SV) is an established assessment tool with good psychometric properties that has been shown to be robust to cultural differences in Western countries. The aims of this study were to: (1) cross-culturally adapt and validate the A-IADL-Q-SV for the German-speaking population of Switzerland; (2) investigate its cultural comparability; and (3) evaluate further psychometric properties.

Methods: The A-IADL-Q-SV German was pretested on clinicians and participants in a memory clinic setting. The psychometric properties and cultural comparability of the questionnaire were investigated in memory clinic settings including participants with MCI or mild dementia, as well as participants with normal cognition recruited from the community. Item response theory (IRT) was applied to investigate measurement invariance by means of differential item functioning to assess item bias. Additionally, the test-retest reliability on scale level, the construct validity through hypothesis testing and the discriminant validity of the A-IADL-Q-SV German were evaluated.

Results: Ninety-six informants of participants with normal cognition, MCI or mild dementia completed the A-IADL-Q-SV German. The basic assumptions for IRT scoring were met. No meaningful differential item functioning for culture was detected between the Swiss and Dutch reference samples. High test-retest reliability on scale level (ICC 0.93; 95% CI 0.9-0.96) was found. More than 75% of the observed correlations between the A-IADL-Q-SV German and clinical measures of cognition and functional status were found to be in the direction and of the magnitude hypothesized. The A-IADL-Q-SV German was shown to be able to discriminate between participants with normal cognition and MCI, as well as MCI and mild dementia.

Conclusions: The A-IADL-Q-SV German is a psychometrically robust measurement tool for a Swiss population with normal cognition, MCI and mild dementia. Thus, it provides a valuable tool to assess IADL functioning in clinical practices and research settings in Switzerland. Trial registration This study was registered retrospectively in July 2019 on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04012398).

Keywords: Amsterdam IADL questionnaire; Assessment; Cross-cultural validation; Elderly people; Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL); Mild cognitive impairment (MCI); Mild dementia.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Latent trait distributions and test characteristic curves. The red dotted lines show the Swiss population and the solid black lines the Dutch reference group. a Latent trait distributions for the Dutch reference sample and the Swiss sample. b Test characteristic curves including all items for the Dutch reference sample and the Swiss sample. c Test characteristic curves including the three items with differential item functioning for the Dutch reference sample and the Swiss sample
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Bland and Altman plot including all participants. The X-axis shows the means of the T-scores of the two measurement time points and the Y-axis the differences in means of the T-scores between the two measurements. The horizontal red dashed line represent the mean difference, the dark blue dashed lines the 95% CI of the mean difference, the blue dashed lines the lower and upper limits of agreement, and the black dotted line the regression line between the mean of the T-scores and difference in the means of the T-scores. Triangles represent participants with mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia and circles participants with normal cognition
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Bland and Altman plot of the subgroups. The horizontal red dashed line represent the mean difference, the dark blue dashed lines the 95% CI of the mean difference, the blue dashed lines the lower and upper limits of agreement, and the black dotted line the regression line between the mean and difference in the means. a The X-axis shows the means of the T-scores of the two measurement time points and the Y-axis the differences in means of the T-scores between the two measurements. b Note this figure is based on the rankits of the T-score in participants with normal cognition. The X-axis shows the means of rankits of the T-scores of the two measurement time points and the Y-axis the differences in means of rankits of the T-scores between the two measurements
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
T-Scores of the three diagnostic groups

References

    1. Farias ST, Lau K, Harvey D, Denny KG, Barba C, Mefford AN. early functional limitations in cognitively normal older adults predict diagnostic conversion to mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2017;65(6):1152–1158. doi: 10.1111/jgs.14835.
    1. Sikkes SA, de Lange-de Klerk ES, Pijnenburg YA, Gillissen F, Romkes R, Knol DL, et al. A new informant-based questionnaire for instrumental activities of daily living in dementia. Alzheimers Dement. 2012;8(6):536–543. doi: 10.1016/j.jalz.2011.08.006.
    1. Petersen RC, Caracciolo B, Brayne C, Gauthier S, Jelic V, Fratiglioni L. Mild cognitive impairment: a concept in evolution. J Intern Med. 2014;275(3):214–228. doi: 10.1111/joim.12190.
    1. Jekel K, Damian M, Wattmo C, Hausner L, Bullock R, Connelly PJ, et al. Mild cognitive impairment and deficits in instrumental activities of daily living: a systematic review. Alzheimers Res Ther. 2015;7(1):17. doi: 10.1186/s13195-015-0099-0.
    1. Ginsberg TB, Powell L, Emrani S, Wasserman V, Higgins S, Chopra A, et al. Instrumental activities of daily living, neuropsychiatric symptoms, and neuropsychological impairment in mild cognitive impairment. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2019;119(2):96–101. doi: 10.7556/jaoa.2019.015.
    1. Sachdev PS, Mohan A, Taylor L, Jeste DV. DSM-5 and mental disorders in older individuals: an overview. Harv Rev Psychiatry. 2015;23(5):320–328. doi: 10.1097/HRP.0000000000000090.
    1. Gold DA. An examination of instrumental activities of daily living assessment in older adults and mild cognitive impairment. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2012;34(1):11–34. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2011.614598.
    1. Marshall GA, Amariglio RE, Sperling RA, Rentz DM. Activities of daily living: where do they fit in the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease? Neurodegener Dis Manag. 2012;2(5):483–491. doi: 10.2217/nmt.12.55.
    1. Lautenschlager NT, Cox K, Cyarto EV. The influence of exercise on brain aging and dementia. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2012;1822(3):474–481. doi: 10.1016/j.bbadis.2011.07.010.
    1. Barrios PG, Gonzalez RP, Hanna SM, Lunde AM, Fields JA, Locke DE, et al. Priority of treatment outcomes for caregivers and patients with mild cognitive impairment: preliminary analyses. Neurol Ther. 2016;5(2):183–192. doi: 10.1007/s40120-016-0049-1.
    1. Lindbergh CA, Dishman RK, Miller LS. Functional disability in mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuropsychol Rev. 2016;26(2):129–159. doi: 10.1007/s11065-016-9321-5.
    1. Sikkes SA, Rotrou J. A qualitative review of instrumental activities of daily living in dementia: what’s cooking? Neurodegener Dis Manag. 2014;4(5):393–400. doi: 10.2217/nmt.14.24.
    1. Kaur N, Belchior P, Gelinas I, Bier N. Critical appraisal of questionnaires to assess functional impairment in individuals with mild cognitive impairment. Int Psychogeriatr. 2016;28(9):1425–1439. doi: 10.1017/S104161021600017X.
    1. Sikkes SA, de Lange-de Klerk ES, Pijnenburg YA, Scheltens P, Uitdehaag BM. A systematic review of Instrumental Activities of Daily Living scales in dementia: room for improvement. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2009;80(1):7–12. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.2008.155838.
    1. Sikkes SA, Knol DL, Pijnenburg YA, de Lange-de Klerk ES, Uitdehaag BM, Scheltens P. Validation of the Amsterdam IADL Questionnaire(c), a new tool to measure instrumental activities of daily living in dementia. Neuroepidemiology. 2013;41(1):35–41. doi: 10.1159/000346277.
    1. Sikkes SA, Pijnenburg YA, Knol DL, de Lange-de Klerk ES, Scheltens P, Uitdehaag BM. Assessment of instrumental activities of daily living in dementia: diagnostic value of the Amsterdam Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Questionnaire. J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol. 2013;26(4):244–250. doi: 10.1177/0891988713509139.
    1. Koster N, Knol DL, Uitdehaag BM, Scheltens P, Sikkes SA. The sensitivity to change over time of the Amsterdam IADL Questionnaire((c)) Alzheimers Dement. 2015;11(10):1231–1240. doi: 10.1016/j.jalz.2014.10.006.
    1. Dubbelman MA, Verrijp M, Facal D, Sánchez-Benavides G, Brown LJE, van der Flier WM, et al. The influence of diversity on the measurement of functional impairment: an International validation of the Amsterdam IADL Questionnaire in eight countries. Alzheimers Dement (Amst) 2020;12(1):e12021.
    1. Costa A, Bak T, Caffarra P, Caltagirone C, Ceccaldi M, Collette F, et al. The need for harmonisation and innovation of neuropsychological assessment in neurodegenerative dementias in Europe: consensus document of the Joint Program for Neurodegenerative Diseases Working Group. Alzheimers Res Ther. 2017;9(1):27. doi: 10.1186/s13195-017-0254-x.
    1. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;5(24):3186–3191. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014.
    1. Wild D, Grove A, Martin M, Eremenco S, McElroy S, Verjee-Lorenz A, et al. Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures: report of the ISPOR task force for translation and cultural adaptation. Value Health. 2005;8(2):94–104. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.04054.x.
    1. Jutten RJ, Peeters CFW, Leijdesdorff SMJ, Visser PJ, Maier AB, Terwee CB, et al. Detecting functional decline from normal aging to dementia: development and validation of a short version of the Amsterdam IADL Questionnaire. Alzheimers Dement (Amst) 2017;8:26–35. doi: 10.1016/j.dadm.2017.03.002.
    1. de Vet HCW, Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL. Measurement in medicine: a practical guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2011.
    1. Burge M, Bieri G, Bruhlmeier M, Colombo F, Demonet JF, Felbecker A, et al. Recommendations of Swiss Memory Clinics for the diagnosis of dementia. Praxis (Bern 1994) 2018;107(8):435–451. doi: 10.1024/1661-8157/a002948.
    1. Lacruz M, Emeny R, Bickel H, Linkohr B, Ladwig K. Feasibility, internal consistency and covariates of TICS-m (telephone interview for cognitive status-modified) in a population-based sample: findings from the KORA-Age study. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2013;28(9):971–978. doi: 10.1002/gps.3916.
    1. Duff K, Shprecher D, Litvan I, Gerstenecker A, Mast B, Investigators E. Correcting for demographic variables on the modified telephone interview for cognitive status. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2014;22(12):1438–1443. doi: 10.1016/j.jagp.2013.08.007.
    1. Kottner J, Audigé L, Brorson S, Donner A, Gajewski BJ, Hróbjartsson A, et al. Guidelines for reporting reliability and agreement studies (GRRAS) were proposed. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(1):96–106. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.03.002.
    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. doi: 10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6.
    1. Morris JC. Clinical dementia rating: a reliable and valid diagnostic and staging measure for dementia of the Alzheimer type. Int Psychogeriatr. 1997;9(Suppl 1):173–176. doi: 10.1017/S1041610297004870.
    1. Olde Rikkert MGM, Tona KD, Janssen L, Burns A, Lobo A, Robert P, et al. Validity, reliability, and feasibility of clinical staging scales in dementia: a systematic review. Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen. 2011;26(5):357–365. doi: 10.1177/1533317511418954.
    1. Ehrensperger MM, Berres M, Taylor KI, Monsch AU. Screening properties of the German IQCODE with a two-year time frame in MCI and early Alzheimer’s disease. Int Psychogeriatr. 2010;22(1):91–100. doi: 10.1017/S1041610209990962.
    1. Jorm AF. The Informant Questionnaire on cognitive decline in the elderly (IQCODE): a review. Int Psychogeriatr. 2004;16(3):275–293. doi: 10.1017/S1041610204000390.
    1. Lawton MP, Brody EM. Assessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist. 1969;9(3):179–186.
    1. Heidenblut S, Zank S. Development of a new screening instrument for geriatric depression. The depression in old age scale (DIA-S) Z Gerontol Geriatr. 2010;43(3):170–176. doi: 10.1007/s00391-009-0067-z.
    1. Heidenblut S, Zank S. Screening for Depression with the Depression in Old Age Scale (DIA-S) and the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS15): diagnostic accuracy in a geriatric inpatient setting. GeroPsych J Gerontopsychol Geriatr Psychiatry. 2014;27(1):41–49.
    1. R-Core-Team. A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria; 2019. . Accessed 29 Feb 2020.
    1. Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus user’s guide. 7. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén; 2012.
    1. Raîche G, Walls TA, Magis D, Riopel M, Blais J-G. Non-graphical solutions for Cattell’s Scree test. Methodology. 2013;9(1):23–29. doi: 10.1027/1614-2241/a000051.
    1. van der Ark LA. Mokken scale analysis in R. J Stat Softw. 2007;20(11):1–19. doi: 10.18637/jss.v020.i11.
    1. van der Flier WM, Scheltens P. Amsterdam dementia cohort: performing research to optimize care. J Alzheimers Dis. 2018;62(3):1091–1111. doi: 10.3233/JAD-170850.
    1. Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34–42. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012.
    1. Jodoin MG, Gierl MJ. Evaluating type I error and power rates using an effect size measure with the logistic regression procedure for DIF detection. Appl Measur Educ. 2001;14(4):329–349. doi: 10.1207/S15324818AME1404_2.
    1. Choi SW, Gibbons LE, Crane PK. lordif: an R package for detecting differential item functioning using iterative hybrid ordinal logistic regression/item response theory and Monte Carlo simulations. J Stat Softw. 2011;39(8):1–30. doi: 10.18637/jss.v039.i08.
    1. Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med. 2016;15(2):155–163. doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012.
    1. Facal D, Carabias MAR, Pereiro AX, Lojo-Seoane C, Campos-Magdaleno M, Jutten RJ, et al. Assessing everyday activities across the dementia spectrum with the Amsterdam IADL Questionnaire. Curr Alzheimer Res. 2018;15(13):1261–1266. doi: 10.2174/1567205015666180925113411.
    1. Herrera A-N, Gómez J. Influence of equal or unequal comparison group sample sizes on the detection of differential item functioning using the Mantel–Haenszel and logistic regression techniques. Qual Quant Int J Methodol. 2008;42(6):739–755. doi: 10.1007/s11135-006-9065-z.

Source: PubMed

Szponzorok és közreműködők

Egészségi állapot

Kábítószer-beavatkozások

3
Iratkozz fel