Semrau Maya, Burns Alistair, Djukic-Dejanovic Slavica, Eraslan Defne, Han Changsu, Lecic-Tosevski Dusica, Lobo Antonio, Mihai Adriana, Morris Julie, Palumbo Claudia, Robert Philippe, Stiens Gerthild, Stoppe Gabriela, Volpe Umberto, Rikkert Marcel Olde, Sartorius Norman
King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, London, UK.
University of Manchester and Manchester Academic Health Science Centre (MAHSC), Manchester, UK.
J Alzheimers Dis. 2015;44(1):139-51. doi: 10.3233/JAD-141599.
A reliable and valid global staging scale has been lacking within dementia care.
To develop an easy-to-use multi-dimensional clinical staging schedule for dementia.
The schedule was developed through: i) Two series of focus groups (40 and 48 participants, respectively) in Denmark, France, Germany, Netherlands, Spain, Switzerland, and UK with a multi-disciplinary group of professionals working within dementia care, to assess the need for a dementia-staging tool and to obtain suggestions on its design and characteristics; ii) A pilot-study over three rounds to test inter-rater reliability of the newly developed schedule using written case histories, with five members of the project's steering committee and 27 of their colleagues from Netherlands, France, and Spain as participants; and iii) A field-study to test the schedule's inter-rater reliability in clinical practice in France, Germany, Netherlands, Spain, Italy, Turkey, South Korea, Romania, and Serbia, which included 209 dementia patients and 217 of their caregivers as participants.
Focus group participants indicated a clear need for a culture-fair international dementia staging scale and reached consensus on face validity and content validity. Accordingly, the schedule has been composed of seven dimensions including behavioral, cognitive, physical, functional, social, and care aspects. Overall, the schedule showed adequate face validity, content validity, and inter-rater reliability; in the nine field-sites, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs; absolute agreement) for individual dimensions ranged between 0.38 and 1.0, with 84.4% of ICCs over 0.7. ICCs for total sum scores ranged between 0.89 and 0.99 in the nine field-sites.
The IDEAL schedule looks promising as tool for the clinical and social management of people with dementia globally, though further reliability and validity testing is needed.
痴呆症护理领域一直缺乏可靠且有效的全球分期量表。
开发一种易于使用的痴呆症多维临床分期方案。
该方案通过以下方式制定:i)在丹麦、法国、德国、荷兰、西班牙、瑞士和英国分别开展了两轮焦点小组讨论(参与者分别为40人和48人),参与者为痴呆症护理领域的多学科专业人员,以评估对痴呆症分期工具的需求,并就其设计和特点获取建议;ii)进行了三轮预试验,使用书面病例史测试新制定方案的评分者间信度,项目指导委员会的五名成员及其来自荷兰、法国和西班牙的27名同事参与其中;iii)开展一项现场研究,在法国、德国、荷兰、西班牙、意大利、土耳其、韩国、罗马尼亚和塞尔维亚的临床实践中测试该方案的评分者间信度,209名痴呆症患者及其217名护理人员参与其中。
焦点小组参与者表示明确需要一种文化公平的国际痴呆症分期量表,并就表面效度和内容效度达成共识。因此,该方案由行为、认知、身体、功能、社会和护理等七个维度组成。总体而言,该方案显示出足够的表面效度、内容效度和评分者间信度;在九个现场研究地点,各维度的组内相关系数(ICCs;绝对一致性)在0.38至1.0之间,84.4%的ICCs超过0.7。九个现场研究地点总分的ICCs在0.89至0.99之间。
IDEAL方案作为全球痴呆症患者临床和社会管理工具看起来很有前景,不过还需要进一步进行信度和效度测试。