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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dauphinot, Virginie, Boublay, Nawèle, Moutet, Claire, Achi, Sarah, Bathsavanis, Anthony, Krolak-Salmon, Pierre
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