Feasibility of Remote Administration of the Uniform Data Set-Version 3 for Assessment of Older Adults With Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer's Disease.

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Bonnie C Sachs, Lauren A Latham, James R Bateman, Mary Jo Cleveland, Mark A Espeland, Eric Fischer, Sarah A Gaussoin, Iris Leng, Stephen R Rapp, Samantha Rogers, Heather M Shappell, Benjamin J Williams, Mia Yang, Suzanne Craft
{"title":"Feasibility of Remote Administration of the Uniform Data Set-Version 3 for Assessment of Older Adults With Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer's Disease.","authors":"Bonnie C Sachs, Lauren A Latham, James R Bateman, Mary Jo Cleveland, Mark A Espeland, Eric Fischer, Sarah A Gaussoin, Iris Leng, Stephen R Rapp, Samantha Rogers, Heather M Shappell, Benjamin J Williams, Mia Yang, Suzanne Craft","doi":"10.1093/arclin/acae001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Assess the feasibility and concurrent validity of a modified Uniform Data Set version 3 (UDSv3) for remote administration for individuals with normal cognition (NC), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and early dementia.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Participants (N = 93) (age: 72.8 [8.9] years; education: 15.6 [2.5] years; 72% female; 84% White) were enrolled from the Wake Forest ADRC. Portions of the UDSv3 cognitive battery, plus the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, were completed by telephone or video within ~6 months of participant's in-person visit. Adaptations for phone administration (e.g., Oral Trails for Trail Making Test [TMT] and Blind Montreal Cognitive Assessment [MoCA] for MoCA) were made. Participants reported on the pleasantness, difficulty, and preference for each modality. Staff provided validity ratings for assessments. Participants' remote data were adjudicated by cognitive experts blinded to the in person-diagnosis (NC [N = 44], MCI [N = 35], Dementia [N = 11], or other [N = 3]).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Remote assessments were rated as pleasant as in-person assessments by 74% of participants and equally difficult by 75%. Staff validity rating (video = 92%; phone = 87.5%) was good. Concordance between remote/in-person scores was generally moderate to good (r = .3 -.8; p < .05) except for TMT-A/OTMT-A (r = .3; p > .05). Agreement between remote/in-person adjudicated cognitive status was good (k = .61-.64).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We found preliminary evidence that older adults, including those with cognitive impairment, can be assessed remotely using a modified UDSv3 research battery. Adjudication of cognitive status that relies on remotely collected data is comparable to classifications using in-person assessments.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11447737/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acae001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Assess the feasibility and concurrent validity of a modified Uniform Data Set version 3 (UDSv3) for remote administration for individuals with normal cognition (NC), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and early dementia.

Method: Participants (N = 93) (age: 72.8 [8.9] years; education: 15.6 [2.5] years; 72% female; 84% White) were enrolled from the Wake Forest ADRC. Portions of the UDSv3 cognitive battery, plus the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, were completed by telephone or video within ~6 months of participant's in-person visit. Adaptations for phone administration (e.g., Oral Trails for Trail Making Test [TMT] and Blind Montreal Cognitive Assessment [MoCA] for MoCA) were made. Participants reported on the pleasantness, difficulty, and preference for each modality. Staff provided validity ratings for assessments. Participants' remote data were adjudicated by cognitive experts blinded to the in person-diagnosis (NC [N = 44], MCI [N = 35], Dementia [N = 11], or other [N = 3]).

Results: Remote assessments were rated as pleasant as in-person assessments by 74% of participants and equally difficult by 75%. Staff validity rating (video = 92%; phone = 87.5%) was good. Concordance between remote/in-person scores was generally moderate to good (r = .3 -.8; p < .05) except for TMT-A/OTMT-A (r = .3; p > .05). Agreement between remote/in-person adjudicated cognitive status was good (k = .61-.64).

Conclusions: We found preliminary evidence that older adults, including those with cognitive impairment, can be assessed remotely using a modified UDSv3 research battery. Adjudication of cognitive status that relies on remotely collected data is comparable to classifications using in-person assessments.

远程管理统一数据集第 3 版以评估患有轻度认知障碍和阿尔茨海默病的老年人的可行性。
目的评估针对认知正常(NC)、轻度认知障碍(MCI)和早期痴呆症患者远程管理经修改的统一数据集版本 3(UDSv3)的可行性和并发有效性:参与者(N = 93)(年龄:72.8 [8.9] 岁;教育程度:15.6 [2.5] 年;72% 为女性;84% 为白人)均来自维克森林 ADRC。UDSv3 认知测试和雷伊听觉言语学习测试的部分内容是在受试者亲诊后约 6 个月内通过电话或视频完成的。对电话施测进行了调整(例如,"寻迹测验"[TMT] 的 "口述寻迹 "和 "盲人蒙特利尔认知评估"[MoCA] 的 "MoCA")。参与者报告了每种方式的舒适度、难度和偏好。工作人员对评估结果进行有效性评级。参与者的远程数据由认知专家进行判定,专家对当面诊断(NC [N = 44]、MCI [N = 35]、痴呆 [N = 11]或其他 [N = 3])视而不见:74%的参与者认为远程评估与面对面评估一样令人愉快,75%的参与者认为同样困难。工作人员的有效性评价(视频=92%;电话=87.5%)良好。远程/现场评分之间的一致性一般为中等至良好(r = .3 -.8; p .05)。远程/亲身判定的认知状态之间的一致性良好(k = .61-.64):我们发现有初步证据表明,可以使用修改后的 UDSv3 研究电池对老年人(包括有认知障碍的老年人)进行远程评估。根据远程收集的数据对认知状况进行判断的结果与通过现场评估进行的分类结果相当。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信