Introduction and preliminary psychometric evaluation of the assessment of functional capacity interview for older adults.

IF 1.4 4区 心理学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Nicole Sergeyev, Nadia Paré, Aneela Rahman, Anjali Krishnan, David E Warren, Trevor Wolterstoff, Anna Wilhelm, Erica Aflagah, Laura Rabin
{"title":"Introduction and preliminary psychometric evaluation of the assessment of functional capacity interview for older adults.","authors":"Nicole Sergeyev, Nadia Paré, Aneela Rahman, Anjali Krishnan, David E Warren, Trevor Wolterstoff, Anna Wilhelm, Erica Aflagah, Laura Rabin","doi":"10.1080/23279095.2024.2419932","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Measures of complex functional decision-making capacity can greatly aid in assessing mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and facilitating early intervention in dementia care. We examined the ability of the Assessment of Functional Capacity Interview (AFCI) to detect functional differences among older adults who were cognitively unimpaired (CU), or who presented with subjective cognitive decline (SCD) or MCI. A sample of 97 older adults (CU; n = 30, Mage = 74.64 ± 7.42 years; SCD; n = 34, Mage = 72.56 ± 6.43 years; MCI; n = 33, Mage = 78.28 ± 7.55 years) underwent neuropsychological testing and responded to the Financial Capacity Instrument (FCI-SF). Informants completed the Assessment of Functional Capacity (AFCI), an instrument of functional decision-making capacity, and responded to the Social Vulnerability Scale (SVS15) and Amsterdam Instrumental Activity of Daily Living (A-IADL-Q-SV), a measure of functional status, for comparison. According to informant-reported responses, the CU group had significantly lower AFCI total (and domain) scores, <i>H</i>(2) = 27.59, <i>p</i><.001, relative to MCI. Additionally, the CU group had significantly lower AFCI scores in the <i>Home and Personal Safety</i> domain relative to the SCD group, <i>H</i>(2) = 14.06, <i>p</i><.05. In the overall sample, AFCI total scores were associated with FCI-SF, SVS15, and A-IADL-Q-SV scores and cognitive measures. Our results demonstrate that the AFCI is sensitive to impairment in safety, social, financial, and medical functioning in MCI and is associated with measures of cognitive functioning and social vulnerability in older adults. Incorporating this instrument as a supplement to cognitive screening instruments may aid in the prevention of hazardous decision-making in older adults.</p>","PeriodicalId":51308,"journal":{"name":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","volume":" ","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2024.2419932","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Measures of complex functional decision-making capacity can greatly aid in assessing mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and facilitating early intervention in dementia care. We examined the ability of the Assessment of Functional Capacity Interview (AFCI) to detect functional differences among older adults who were cognitively unimpaired (CU), or who presented with subjective cognitive decline (SCD) or MCI. A sample of 97 older adults (CU; n = 30, Mage = 74.64 ± 7.42 years; SCD; n = 34, Mage = 72.56 ± 6.43 years; MCI; n = 33, Mage = 78.28 ± 7.55 years) underwent neuropsychological testing and responded to the Financial Capacity Instrument (FCI-SF). Informants completed the Assessment of Functional Capacity (AFCI), an instrument of functional decision-making capacity, and responded to the Social Vulnerability Scale (SVS15) and Amsterdam Instrumental Activity of Daily Living (A-IADL-Q-SV), a measure of functional status, for comparison. According to informant-reported responses, the CU group had significantly lower AFCI total (and domain) scores, H(2) = 27.59, p<.001, relative to MCI. Additionally, the CU group had significantly lower AFCI scores in the Home and Personal Safety domain relative to the SCD group, H(2) = 14.06, p<.05. In the overall sample, AFCI total scores were associated with FCI-SF, SVS15, and A-IADL-Q-SV scores and cognitive measures. Our results demonstrate that the AFCI is sensitive to impairment in safety, social, financial, and medical functioning in MCI and is associated with measures of cognitive functioning and social vulnerability in older adults. Incorporating this instrument as a supplement to cognitive screening instruments may aid in the prevention of hazardous decision-making in older adults.

老年人功能能力评估访谈的介绍和初步心理测量学评估。
对复杂功能决策能力的测量可极大地帮助评估轻度认知障碍(MCI),并促进对痴呆症护理的早期干预。我们研究了功能能力评估访谈(AFCI)检测认知功能未受损(CU)或出现主观认知功能下降(SCD)或 MCI 的老年人的功能差异的能力。97 名老年人(CU;n = 30,Mage = 74.64 ± 7.42 岁;SCD;n = 34,Mage = 72.56 ± 6.43 岁;MCI;n = 33,Mage = 78.28 ± 7.55 岁)接受了神经心理学测试,并回答了财务能力问卷(FCI-SF)。信息提供者完成了功能决策能力评估(AFCI),并回答了社会脆弱性量表(SVS15)和阿姆斯特丹日常生活工具活动(A-IADL-Q-SV)(一种功能状态测量),以进行比较。根据信息提供者的报告,CU 组的 AFCI 总分(和领域分)显著低于 SCD 组,H(2) = 27.59,pHome 和个人安全领域分显著低于 SCD 组,H(2) = 14.06, p
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
Applied Neuropsychology-Adult
Applied Neuropsychology-Adult CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-PSYCHOLOGY
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
11.80%
发文量
134
期刊介绍: pplied Neuropsychology-Adult publishes clinical neuropsychological articles concerning assessment, brain functioning and neuroimaging, neuropsychological treatment, and rehabilitation in adults. Full-length articles and brief communications are included. Case studies of adult patients carefully assessing the nature, course, or treatment of clinical neuropsychological dysfunctions in the context of scientific literature, are suitable. Review manuscripts addressing critical issues are encouraged. Preference is given to papers of clinical relevance to others in the field. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief, and, if found suitable for further considerations are peer reviewed by independent, anonymous expert referees. All peer review is single-blind and submission is online via ScholarOne Manuscripts.
×
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