Cargando…

Psychometric properties of outcome measures in non‐pharmacological interventions of persons with dementia in low‐and middle‐income countries: A systematic review

Despite high burden of dementia in low‐and middle‐income countries (LMICs), only a small number of clinical trials of psychosocial interventions for persons with dementia (PwD) have been conducted in these settings. It is essential that such trials use appropriate outcome measures that are methodolo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Du, Bharath, Lakshminarayanan, Monisha, Krishna, Murali, Vaitheswaran, Sridhar, Chandra, Mina, Kunnukattil Sivaraman, Shaji, Goswami, Satyapal Puri, Rangaswamy, Thara, Spector, Aimee, Stoner, Charlotte R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7986620/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33336529
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/psyg.12647
_version_ 1783668477899309056
author Du, Bharath
Lakshminarayanan, Monisha
Krishna, Murali
Vaitheswaran, Sridhar
Chandra, Mina
Kunnukattil Sivaraman, Shaji
Goswami, Satyapal Puri
Rangaswamy, Thara
Spector, Aimee
Stoner, Charlotte R.
author_facet Du, Bharath
Lakshminarayanan, Monisha
Krishna, Murali
Vaitheswaran, Sridhar
Chandra, Mina
Kunnukattil Sivaraman, Shaji
Goswami, Satyapal Puri
Rangaswamy, Thara
Spector, Aimee
Stoner, Charlotte R.
author_sort Du, Bharath
collection PubMed
description Despite high burden of dementia in low‐and middle‐income countries (LMICs), only a small number of clinical trials of psychosocial interventions for persons with dementia (PwD) have been conducted in these settings. It is essential that such trials use appropriate outcome measures that are methodologically robust and culturally appropriate to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions. We carried out a systematic review to examine the evidence base and psychometric properties of measures employed in these studies in LMICs. A systematic search of published literature on randomised controlled trials (RCT) of psychosocial interventions for PwD in LMICs between 2008 and April 2020 was carried out. Measures employed in each of the eligible studies were identified and through a focused search, we further explored the evidence base and psychometric properties employing Terwee criteria. Data extraction and quality appraisal were conducted by two independent reviewers. The review identified 41 measures from 17 RCTS which fulfilled eligibility criteria and they examined effectiveness across the domains of cognition (n = 16), behaviour and psychological symptoms (n = 11) and quality of life (n = 8). Of these 41, we were able to access relevant literature only for 18 and they were subject to psychometric analysis. Psychometric properties of these 18 instruments were at best modest, with Terwee scores ranging from 3 (low) to 15 (moderate). A majority of the studies were from China (n = 5) and Brazil (n = 6). The evidence base for the routinely employed measures in RCTs of non‐pharmacological interventions for PwD in LMICs is limited. The quality of adaptation and validation of these instruments is variable and studies are largely uninformative about their psychometric properties and cultural appropriateness to the study setting. There is an urgent need to develop scientifically robust instruments in LMIC settings that can be confidently employed to measure outcomes in trials of psychosocial interventions for PwD.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7986620
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79866202021-03-25 Psychometric properties of outcome measures in non‐pharmacological interventions of persons with dementia in low‐and middle‐income countries: A systematic review Du, Bharath Lakshminarayanan, Monisha Krishna, Murali Vaitheswaran, Sridhar Chandra, Mina Kunnukattil Sivaraman, Shaji Goswami, Satyapal Puri Rangaswamy, Thara Spector, Aimee Stoner, Charlotte R. Psychogeriatrics Review Articles Despite high burden of dementia in low‐and middle‐income countries (LMICs), only a small number of clinical trials of psychosocial interventions for persons with dementia (PwD) have been conducted in these settings. It is essential that such trials use appropriate outcome measures that are methodologically robust and culturally appropriate to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions. We carried out a systematic review to examine the evidence base and psychometric properties of measures employed in these studies in LMICs. A systematic search of published literature on randomised controlled trials (RCT) of psychosocial interventions for PwD in LMICs between 2008 and April 2020 was carried out. Measures employed in each of the eligible studies were identified and through a focused search, we further explored the evidence base and psychometric properties employing Terwee criteria. Data extraction and quality appraisal were conducted by two independent reviewers. The review identified 41 measures from 17 RCTS which fulfilled eligibility criteria and they examined effectiveness across the domains of cognition (n = 16), behaviour and psychological symptoms (n = 11) and quality of life (n = 8). Of these 41, we were able to access relevant literature only for 18 and they were subject to psychometric analysis. Psychometric properties of these 18 instruments were at best modest, with Terwee scores ranging from 3 (low) to 15 (moderate). A majority of the studies were from China (n = 5) and Brazil (n = 6). The evidence base for the routinely employed measures in RCTs of non‐pharmacological interventions for PwD in LMICs is limited. The quality of adaptation and validation of these instruments is variable and studies are largely uninformative about their psychometric properties and cultural appropriateness to the study setting. There is an urgent need to develop scientifically robust instruments in LMIC settings that can be confidently employed to measure outcomes in trials of psychosocial interventions for PwD. John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 2020-12-17 2021-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7986620/ /pubmed/33336529 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/psyg.12647 Text en © 2020 The Authors Psychogeriatrics published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japanese Psychogeriatric Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review Articles
Du, Bharath
Lakshminarayanan, Monisha
Krishna, Murali
Vaitheswaran, Sridhar
Chandra, Mina
Kunnukattil Sivaraman, Shaji
Goswami, Satyapal Puri
Rangaswamy, Thara
Spector, Aimee
Stoner, Charlotte R.
Psychometric properties of outcome measures in non‐pharmacological interventions of persons with dementia in low‐and middle‐income countries: A systematic review
title Psychometric properties of outcome measures in non‐pharmacological interventions of persons with dementia in low‐and middle‐income countries: A systematic review
title_full Psychometric properties of outcome measures in non‐pharmacological interventions of persons with dementia in low‐and middle‐income countries: A systematic review
title_fullStr Psychometric properties of outcome measures in non‐pharmacological interventions of persons with dementia in low‐and middle‐income countries: A systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Psychometric properties of outcome measures in non‐pharmacological interventions of persons with dementia in low‐and middle‐income countries: A systematic review
title_short Psychometric properties of outcome measures in non‐pharmacological interventions of persons with dementia in low‐and middle‐income countries: A systematic review
title_sort psychometric properties of outcome measures in non‐pharmacological interventions of persons with dementia in low‐and middle‐income countries: a systematic review
topic Review Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7986620/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33336529
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/psyg.12647
work_keys_str_mv AT dubharath psychometricpropertiesofoutcomemeasuresinnonpharmacologicalinterventionsofpersonswithdementiainlowandmiddleincomecountriesasystematicreview
AT lakshminarayananmonisha psychometricpropertiesofoutcomemeasuresinnonpharmacologicalinterventionsofpersonswithdementiainlowandmiddleincomecountriesasystematicreview
AT krishnamurali psychometricpropertiesofoutcomemeasuresinnonpharmacologicalinterventionsofpersonswithdementiainlowandmiddleincomecountriesasystematicreview
AT vaitheswaransridhar psychometricpropertiesofoutcomemeasuresinnonpharmacologicalinterventionsofpersonswithdementiainlowandmiddleincomecountriesasystematicreview
AT chandramina psychometricpropertiesofoutcomemeasuresinnonpharmacologicalinterventionsofpersonswithdementiainlowandmiddleincomecountriesasystematicreview
AT kunnukattilsivaramanshaji psychometricpropertiesofoutcomemeasuresinnonpharmacologicalinterventionsofpersonswithdementiainlowandmiddleincomecountriesasystematicreview
AT goswamisatyapalpuri psychometricpropertiesofoutcomemeasuresinnonpharmacologicalinterventionsofpersonswithdementiainlowandmiddleincomecountriesasystematicreview
AT rangaswamythara psychometricpropertiesofoutcomemeasuresinnonpharmacologicalinterventionsofpersonswithdementiainlowandmiddleincomecountriesasystematicreview
AT spectoraimee psychometricpropertiesofoutcomemeasuresinnonpharmacologicalinterventionsofpersonswithdementiainlowandmiddleincomecountriesasystematicreview
AT stonercharlotter psychometricpropertiesofoutcomemeasuresinnonpharmacologicalinterventionsofpersonswithdementiainlowandmiddleincomecountriesasystematicreview