Raúl López-Antón1,2, Juan Ramón Barrada1, Javier Santabárbara2,3, Mar Posadas-de Miguel2, Luís Agüera4,5, Carmen Burillo6, Manuel Franco7, Jorge López-Álvarez4, Pilar Mesa8, Roberto Petidier9, Miguel Ángel Quintanilla10, Bernabé Robles-Del Olmo11, Tirso Ventura2,10,12, Maya Semrau13, Norman Sartorius14, Antonio Lobo2,5,12. 1. Department of Psychology and Sociology, Universidad de Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain. 2. Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Aragón (IIS Aragón), Zaragoza, Spain. 3. Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Universidad de Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain. 4. Department of Psychiatry and Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria (imas12), Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain. 5. Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental (CIBERSAM), Ministry of Science and Innovation, Madrid, Spain. 6. Asociación de Familiares de Enfermos de Alzheimer (AFEDAZ), Zaragoza, Spain. 7. Servicio de Psiquiatría y Salud Mental, Complejo Asistencial de Zamora, Zamora, Spain. 8. Geriatric Service, Hospital Nuestra Señora de Gracia, Zaragoza, Spain. 9. Geriatric Service, Hospital Universitario de Getafe, Madrid, Spain. 10. Psychiatry Service, Hospital Clínico Universitario, Zaragoza, Spain. 11. Neurology Service, Parc Sanitari Sant Joan de Déu, Sant Boi de Llobregat, Spain. 12. Department of Medicine and Psychiatry, Universidad de Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain. 13. King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Neuroscience, London, UK. 14. Association for the Improvement of Mental Health Programmes (AMH), Geneva, Switzerland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The IDEAL Schedule was developed for staging "care needs" in patients with dementia. We here aim to validate the Spanish version, further test its psychometric properties and explore a latent construct for "care needs". METHODS: A multicenter study was done in 8 dementia care facilities across Spain. Patients referred with a reliable ICD-10 diagnosis of dementia (n = 151) were assessed with the IDEAL Schedule by pairs of raters. Inter-rater reliability (intra-class correlation [ICC] coefficients), internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha), and factor analysis were calculated. Convergent validity for individual items was tested against validated Spanish versions of international instruments. RESULTS: Pilot testing with numerical scales supported the feasibility, face, and content validity of the schedule. The psychometric coefficients were good/clinically acceptable: inter-rater reliability (mean ICC = 0.861; 85% of the ICCs > 0.8), internal consistency (global alpha coefficient = 0.74 in 5 nuclear items), and concurrent validity (global score against the Clinical Dementia Rating schedule, r = 0.63; coefficients for individual items ranging from 0.40 to 0.84, all statistically significant, p < 0.05). Internal consistency was low for the "nonprofessional care" and "social support" dimensions. Factor analysis supported a unidimensional solution, suggesting a latent "care needs" construct. CONCLUSION: The Spanish version of the IDEAL Schedule confirms the main psychometric properties of the original version and documents for the first time the convergent validity of individual items. Factor analysis identified a latent construct consistent with the concept "care needs" although 2 dimensions need further psychometric research.
OBJECTIVE: The IDEAL Schedule was developed for staging "care needs" in patients with dementia. We here aim to validate the Spanish version, further test its psychometric properties and explore a latent construct for "care needs". METHODS: A multicenter study was done in 8 dementia care facilities across Spain. Patients referred with a reliable ICD-10 diagnosis of dementia (n = 151) were assessed with the IDEAL Schedule by pairs of raters. Inter-rater reliability (intra-class correlation [ICC] coefficients), internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha), and factor analysis were calculated. Convergent validity for individual items was tested against validated Spanish versions of international instruments. RESULTS: Pilot testing with numerical scales supported the feasibility, face, and content validity of the schedule. The psychometric coefficients were good/clinically acceptable: inter-rater reliability (mean ICC = 0.861; 85% of the ICCs > 0.8), internal consistency (global alpha coefficient = 0.74 in 5 nuclear items), and concurrent validity (global score against the Clinical Dementia Rating schedule, r = 0.63; coefficients for individual items ranging from 0.40 to 0.84, all statistically significant, p < 0.05). Internal consistency was low for the "nonprofessional care" and "social support" dimensions. Factor analysis supported a unidimensional solution, suggesting a latent "care needs" construct. CONCLUSION: The Spanish version of the IDEAL Schedule confirms the main psychometric properties of the original version and documents for the first time the convergent validity of individual items. Factor analysis identified a latent construct consistent with the concept "care needs" although 2 dimensions need further psychometric research.