Cargando…
Comparison of Instrumental Activities of Daily Living assessment by face-to-face or telephone interviews: a randomized, crossover study
BACKGROUND: The functional autonomy assessment is essential to manage patients with a neurodegenerative disease, but its evaluation is not always possible during a consultation. To optimize ambulatory autonomy assessment, we compared the Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) question...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7068883/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32169093 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13195-020-00590-w |
_version_ | 1783505663311216640 |
---|---|
author | Dauphinot, Virginie Boublay, Nawèle Moutet, Claire Achi, Sarah Bathsavanis, Anthony Krolak-Salmon, Pierre |
author_facet | Dauphinot, Virginie Boublay, Nawèle Moutet, Claire Achi, Sarah Bathsavanis, Anthony Krolak-Salmon, Pierre |
author_sort | Dauphinot, Virginie |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The functional autonomy assessment is essential to manage patients with a neurodegenerative disease, but its evaluation is not always possible during a consultation. To optimize ambulatory autonomy assessment, we compared the Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) questionnaire collected by telephone and face-to-face interviews. METHODS: A randomized, crossover study was carried out among patients attending a memory clinic (MC). The IADL questionnaire was collected for patients during telephone and face-to-face interviews between nurses and patients’ caregivers. The agreement between the two methods was measured using the proportion of participants giving the same response, Cohen’s kappa, intraclass correlation (ICC) coefficient, and Bland and Altman method. The associations between patients’ characteristics, events occurring between the two assessments, and agreement were assessed. RESULTS: Among the 292 patients (means ± SD age 81.5 ± 7, MMSE 19.6 ± 6, 39.7% with major neurocognitive disorders) analyzed, the proportion of agreement between the two modes was 89.4% for the total IADL score. Weighted kappa coefficient was 0.66 and ICC score was 0.91 for total IADL score. The mean difference between the IADL score by telephone or face-to-face was 0.32. Overall, 96.9% of measures lay within the 95% limits of agreement. The occurrence of fall was less likely associated with the probability to lie within the 95% limits of agreement (OR = 0.07 [0.02–0.27]). CONCLUSION: The administration of IADL by telephone with the caregiver appears to be an acceptable method of assessment for MC patients compared to face-to-face interview. The events such as falls which could occur in a time close to the evaluation should be reported. STUDY REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02654574. Retrospectively registered: 13 January 2016 |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7068883 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-70688832020-03-18 Comparison of Instrumental Activities of Daily Living assessment by face-to-face or telephone interviews: a randomized, crossover study Dauphinot, Virginie Boublay, Nawèle Moutet, Claire Achi, Sarah Bathsavanis, Anthony Krolak-Salmon, Pierre Alzheimers Res Ther Research BACKGROUND: The functional autonomy assessment is essential to manage patients with a neurodegenerative disease, but its evaluation is not always possible during a consultation. To optimize ambulatory autonomy assessment, we compared the Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) questionnaire collected by telephone and face-to-face interviews. METHODS: A randomized, crossover study was carried out among patients attending a memory clinic (MC). The IADL questionnaire was collected for patients during telephone and face-to-face interviews between nurses and patients’ caregivers. The agreement between the two methods was measured using the proportion of participants giving the same response, Cohen’s kappa, intraclass correlation (ICC) coefficient, and Bland and Altman method. The associations between patients’ characteristics, events occurring between the two assessments, and agreement were assessed. RESULTS: Among the 292 patients (means ± SD age 81.5 ± 7, MMSE 19.6 ± 6, 39.7% with major neurocognitive disorders) analyzed, the proportion of agreement between the two modes was 89.4% for the total IADL score. Weighted kappa coefficient was 0.66 and ICC score was 0.91 for total IADL score. The mean difference between the IADL score by telephone or face-to-face was 0.32. Overall, 96.9% of measures lay within the 95% limits of agreement. The occurrence of fall was less likely associated with the probability to lie within the 95% limits of agreement (OR = 0.07 [0.02–0.27]). CONCLUSION: The administration of IADL by telephone with the caregiver appears to be an acceptable method of assessment for MC patients compared to face-to-face interview. The events such as falls which could occur in a time close to the evaluation should be reported. STUDY REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02654574. Retrospectively registered: 13 January 2016 BioMed Central 2020-03-13 /pmc/articles/PMC7068883/ /pubmed/32169093 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13195-020-00590-w Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Dauphinot, Virginie Boublay, Nawèle Moutet, Claire Achi, Sarah Bathsavanis, Anthony Krolak-Salmon, Pierre Comparison of Instrumental Activities of Daily Living assessment by face-to-face or telephone interviews: a randomized, crossover study |
title | Comparison of Instrumental Activities of Daily Living assessment by face-to-face or telephone interviews: a randomized, crossover study |
title_full | Comparison of Instrumental Activities of Daily Living assessment by face-to-face or telephone interviews: a randomized, crossover study |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Instrumental Activities of Daily Living assessment by face-to-face or telephone interviews: a randomized, crossover study |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Instrumental Activities of Daily Living assessment by face-to-face or telephone interviews: a randomized, crossover study |
title_short | Comparison of Instrumental Activities of Daily Living assessment by face-to-face or telephone interviews: a randomized, crossover study |
title_sort | comparison of instrumental activities of daily living assessment by face-to-face or telephone interviews: a randomized, crossover study |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7068883/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32169093 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13195-020-00590-w |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dauphinotvirginie comparisonofinstrumentalactivitiesofdailylivingassessmentbyfacetofaceortelephoneinterviewsarandomizedcrossoverstudy AT boublaynawele comparisonofinstrumentalactivitiesofdailylivingassessmentbyfacetofaceortelephoneinterviewsarandomizedcrossoverstudy AT moutetclaire comparisonofinstrumentalactivitiesofdailylivingassessmentbyfacetofaceortelephoneinterviewsarandomizedcrossoverstudy AT achisarah comparisonofinstrumentalactivitiesofdailylivingassessmentbyfacetofaceortelephoneinterviewsarandomizedcrossoverstudy AT bathsavanisanthony comparisonofinstrumentalactivitiesofdailylivingassessmentbyfacetofaceortelephoneinterviewsarandomizedcrossoverstudy AT krolaksalmonpierre comparisonofinstrumentalactivitiesofdailylivingassessmentbyfacetofaceortelephoneinterviewsarandomizedcrossoverstudy |