BACKGROUND: Measuring impairments in "instrumental activities of daily living" (IADL) is important in dementia, but challenging due to the lack of reliable and valid instruments. We recently developed the Amsterdam Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Questionnaire (A-IADL-Q; note 1). We aim to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of the A-IADL-Q for dementia in a memory clinic setting. METHODS: Patients visiting the Alzheimer Center of the VU University Medical Center with their informants between 2009 and 2011 were included (N = 278). Diagnoses were established in a multidisciplinary consensus meeting, independent of the A-IADL-Q scores. An optimal A-IADL-Q cutoff point was determined, and sensitivity and specificity were calculated. Area under the curves (AUCs) were compared between A-IADL-Q and "disability assessment of dementia" (DAD). The additional diagnostic value of the A-IADL-Q to Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) was examined using logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Dementia prevalence was 50.5%. Overall diagnostic accuracy based on the AUC was 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70-0.81) for the A-IADL-Q and 0.70 (95% CI: 0.63-0.77) for the DAD, which did not differ significantly. The optimal cutoff score for the A-IADL-Q was 51.4, resulting in sensitivity of 0.74 and specificity of 0.64. Combining the A-IADL-Q with the MMSE improved specificity (0.94), with a decline in sensitivity (0.55). Logistic regression models showed that adding A-IADL-Q improved the diagnostic accuracy (Z = 2.55, P = .011), whereas the DAD did not. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we showed a fair diagnostic accuracy for A-IADL-Q and an additional value in the diagnosis of dementia. These results support the role of A-IADL-Q as a valuable diagnostic tool.
BACKGROUND: Measuring impairments in "instrumental activities of daily living" (IADL) is important in dementia, but challenging due to the lack of reliable and valid instruments. We recently developed the Amsterdam Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Questionnaire (A-IADL-Q; note 1). We aim to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of the A-IADL-Q for dementia in a memory clinic setting. METHODS:Patients visiting the Alzheimer Center of the VU University Medical Center with their informants between 2009 and 2011 were included (N = 278). Diagnoses were established in a multidisciplinary consensus meeting, independent of the A-IADL-Q scores. An optimal A-IADL-Q cutoff point was determined, and sensitivity and specificity were calculated. Area under the curves (AUCs) were compared between A-IADL-Q and "disability assessment of dementia" (DAD). The additional diagnostic value of the A-IADL-Q to Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) was examined using logistic regression analyses. RESULTS:Dementia prevalence was 50.5%. Overall diagnostic accuracy based on the AUC was 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70-0.81) for the A-IADL-Q and 0.70 (95% CI: 0.63-0.77) for the DAD, which did not differ significantly. The optimal cutoff score for the A-IADL-Q was 51.4, resulting in sensitivity of 0.74 and specificity of 0.64. Combining the A-IADL-Q with the MMSE improved specificity (0.94), with a decline in sensitivity (0.55). Logistic regression models showed that adding A-IADL-Q improved the diagnostic accuracy (Z = 2.55, P = .011), whereas the DAD did not. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we showed a fair diagnostic accuracy for A-IADL-Q and an additional value in the diagnosis of dementia. These results support the role of A-IADL-Q as a valuable diagnostic tool.
Entities:
Keywords:
Alzheimer disease; activities of daily living; dementia; diagnosis; informant; questionnaire; sensitivity and specificity
Authors: Giulio E Lancioni; Nirbhay N Singh; Mark F O'Reilly; Jeff Sigafoos; Fiora D'Amico; Gabriele Ferlisi; Floriana Denitto; Floriana De Vanna; Marta Olivetti Belardinelli Journal: Front Aging Neurosci Date: 2015-06-03 Impact factor: 5.750
Authors: Roos J Jutten; Carel F W Peeters; Sophie M J Leijdesdorff; Pieter Jelle Visser; Andrea B Maier; Caroline B Terwee; Philip Scheltens; Sietske A M Sikkes Journal: Alzheimers Dement (Amst) Date: 2017-03-31
Authors: Alberto Costa; Thomas Bak; Paolo Caffarra; Carlo Caltagirone; Mathieu Ceccaldi; Fabienne Collette; Sebastian Crutch; Sergio Della Sala; Jean François Démonet; Bruno Dubois; Emrah Duzel; Peter Nestor; Sokratis G Papageorgiou; Eric Salmon; Sietske Sikkes; Pietro Tiraboschi; Wiesje M van der Flier; Pieter Jelle Visser; Stefano F Cappa Journal: Alzheimers Res Ther Date: 2017-04-17 Impact factor: 6.982
Authors: Roos J Jutten; John Harrison; Frank Jan de Jong; André Aleman; Craig W Ritchie; Philip Scheltens; Sietske A M Sikkes Journal: Alzheimers Dement (N Y) Date: 2017-02-09
Authors: Roos J Jutten; John E Harrison; Philippe R Lee Meeuw Kjoe; Silvia Ingala; R Vreeswijk; R A J van Deelen; Frank Jan de Jong; Esther M Opmeer; André Aleman; Craig W Ritchie; Philip Scheltens; Sietske A M Sikkes Journal: Alzheimers Res Ther Date: 2019-05-15 Impact factor: 6.982
Authors: Megan Heffernan; Gavin Andrews; Maria A Fiatarone Singh; Michael Valenzuela; Kaarin J Anstey; Anthony J Maeder; John McNeil; Louisa Jorm; Nicola T Lautenschlager; Perminder S Sachdev; Jeewani A Ginige; Megan J Hobbs; Christos Boulamatsis; Tiffany Chau; Lynne Cobiac; Kay L Cox; Kenneth Daniel; Victoria M Flood; Yareni Guerrero; Jane Gunn; Nidhi Jain; Nicole A Kochan; Amit Lampit; Yorgi Mavros; Jacinda Meiklejohn; Yian Noble; Fiona O'Leary; Sue Radd-Vagenas; Courtney C Walton; Henry Brodaty Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2019 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Sam T Creavin; Susanna Wisniewski; Anna H Noel-Storr; Clare M Trevelyan; Thomas Hampton; Dane Rayment; Victoria M Thom; Kirsty J E Nash; Hosam Elhamoui; Rowena Milligan; Anish S Patel; Demitra V Tsivos; Tracey Wing; Emma Phillips; Sophie M Kellman; Hannah L Shackleton; Georgina F Singleton; Bethany E Neale; Martha E Watton; Sarah Cullum Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2016-01-13
Authors: Giulio E Lancioni; Nirbhay N Singh; Mark F O'Reilly; Jeff Sigafoos; Fiora D'Amico; Caterina Renna; Katia Pinto Journal: Front Aging Neurosci Date: 2016-04-21 Impact factor: 5.750