Validation of the Spanish version of the Lawton IADL Scale for its application in elderly people

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

José María Quintana⁵  Gemma Navarro⁴  Susana Garcia-Gutierrez³  Miren Orive³  Amaia Bilbao¹  Itziar Vergara² 

[1] Research Unit, Basurto University Hospital (Osakidetza) - Red de investigación en servicios de salud en enfermedades crónicas (REDISSEC), Bilbao, Bizkaia, Spain;Primary Care Research Unit-Gipuzkoa, Osakidetza, Spain-Red de investigación en servicios de salud en enfermedades crónicas (REDISSEC), P. Dr Beguiristain s/n, San Sebastian, Spain;Research Unit, Galdakao-Usansolo Hospital- Red de investigación en servicios de salud en enfermedades crónicas (REDISSEC), Galdakao, Bizkaia, Spain;Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Corporacio Sanitaria Parc Tauli, Barcelona, Spain;Public Health and Preventive Medicine Department, Basque Country University (UPV-EHU), Leioa, Bizkaia, Spain

关键词: Psychometric properties;    Responsiveness;    Reliability;    Validity;    Elderly;    IADL assessment;    Lawton Scale;   

Others  :  824958
DOI  :  10.1186/1477-7525-10-130

 received in 2012-05-21, accepted in 2012-10-15,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

The adequate information about the functional capacity of elderly populations is a key for the comprehensive assessment of their health status and autonomy. The Lawton IADL (instrumental activities of daily living) Scale is a very often used scale to assess independent living skills, but has never been validated for its use in Spanish-speaking populations. The purpose of this study was to assess the validity, the reliability, and responsiveness of this widely used scale.

Methods

The validation was based on a prospective cohort of 1,965 patients aged 65 or over who suffered an accidental fall with a hip or wrist fracture as a result. These patients were followed up six months after the production of the fracture. Cronbach’s alpha was used to assess reliability, and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for the construct validity. Convergent and discriminant validity were examined by the correlation of the IADL Scale with the Barthel Index, SF-12, WOMAC short form, and QuickDASH questionnaires. Known-groups validity was also studied comparing IADL Scale according to different groups, and responsiveness was assessed by means of effect sizes.

Results

The mean age was 80.04 years (SD 8.04). The Cronbach alpha coefficient was 0.94. In the EFA, factor loadings ranged from 0.67 to 0.90, and CFA confirmed the homogeneity of the construct. Regarding the convergent validity, all correlation coefficients were higher than 0.40. Significant differences were found according to different groups, supporting known-groups validity. Responsiveness parameters showed moderate to large changes (effect sizes, 0.79 and 0.84 among patients classified as worsened).

Conclusions

These results confirm that the Spanish version of the Lawton IADL Scale has excellent reliability and validity and a moderate to large sensitivity to change. This study provides a proper validation, not only of the Spanish version of the Lawton IADL Scale, but also of the original instrument.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Vergara et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Pearson V: Assessment of function. In Assessing older persons: Measures, meaning, and practical applications. Edited by Kane RL, Kane RA. New York: Oxford University Press; 2000:17-48.
• [2]Ward G: A review of instrumental ADL assessments for use with elderly people. Rev Clin Gerontol 1998, 8(1):65-71.
• [3]Martín-Lesende I, Ortiz-Lebaniegos I, Montalvillo-Delgado A, et al.: Identificación de ítems para la creación de un cuestionario de valoración de actividades nstrumentales de la vida diaria en personas mayores. Aten Primaria 2006, 7(6):313-319.
• [4]Kane RA, Kane RL: Evaluación de las necesidades de los ancianos: guía práctica sobre los instrumentos de medición. Madrid: SG editores SA; 1990.
• [5]Lawton MP, Brody EM: Assessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist 1969, 9(3):179-186.
• [6]Van der Putten JJMF, Hobart JC, Freeman JA, et al.: Measuring the change in disability after inpatient rehabilitation; comparison of the responsiveness of the Barthel Index and Functional Independence Measure. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1999, 66(4):480-484.
• [7]Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD: A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Medical Care 1996, 34(3):220-233.
• [8]Gandek B, Ware JE, Aaronson NK, et al.: Cross-validation of item selection and scoring for the SF-12 Health Survey in nine countries: results from the IQOLA Project. International Quality of Life Assessment. J Clin Epidemiol 1998, 51:1171-1178.
• [9]Alonso J, Prieto L, Anto JM: The Spanish version of the SF-36 Health Survey (the SF-36 health questionnaire): an instrument for measuring clinical results. Med Clin 1995, 104:771-776.
• [10]Bilbao A, Quintana JM, Escobar A, et al.: Validation of a proposed WOMAC short form for patients with hip osteoarthritis. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 2011, 9:75. BioMed Central Full Text
• [11]Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, et al.: Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 1988, 15:1833-1840.
• [12]Escobar A, Quintana JM, Bilbao A, et al.: Validation of the Spanish version of the WOMAC questionnaire for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis. Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Clin Rheumatol 2002, 21:466-471.
• [13]Institute for Work & Health: Spanish (Spain) translation courtesy of Dr. R.S. Rosales, MD, PhD, Institute for Research in Hand Surgery. GECOT: Unidad de Cirugía de La Mano y Microcirugía Tenerife Spain; 2006.
• [14]Cronbach LJ: Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of test. Psychometrika 1951, 16:297-334.
• [15]Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH: Psychometric theory. 3rd edition. New York: mMcGraw-Hill; 1994.
• [16]Staquet MJ, Hays RD, Fayers PM: Quality of life assessment in clinical trials. Oxford: Oxford Press; 1998.
• [17]Mulaik SA: Evaluation of goodness-of-fit indices for structural equation models. Psychol Bull 1989, 105:430-445.
• [18]Muthén LK, Muthén : BO Mplus User’s Guide. Sixth edition. CA: Muthén & Muthén, Los Angeles; 1998–2010.
• [19]Batista-Foguet J, Coenders G, Alonso J: Confirmatory factor analysis. Its role on the validation of health related questionnaires. Med Clin 2004, 122(Suppl 1):21-27.
• [20]Devins GM, Dion R, Pelletier LG, et al.: Structure of lifestyle disruptions in chronic disease: a confirmatory factor analysis of the Illness Intrusiveness Ratings Scale. Med Care 2001, 39:1097-1104.
• [21]Hatcher L: Developing Measurement Models with Confirmatory Factor Analysis. In In A step-by-step approach to using the SAS® System for factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modeling. Edited by Cary . NC: SAS Institute Inc; 1994:249-342.
• [22]Graf C: The Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL)Scale. Annals of long term care. Best Practices in Nursing Care to Older Adults From The Hartford Institute for Geriatric Nursing New York University, College of Nursing Issue Number 23, Revised 2007 Series Editor: Marie Boltz, MSN, APRN, BC, GNP Managing Editor: Sherry A. Greenberg, MSN, APRN, BC, GNP New York University College of Nursing 2007, 23. http://www.annalsoflongtermcare.com/article/7453 webcite (accesed 19/10/2012)
• [23]Peek MK, Coward RT: Gender differences in the risk of developing disability among older adults with arthritis. J Aging Health 1999, 11:131-150.
• [24]Tomasá C, Zunzunegui MV, Moreno LA, et al.: Dependencia evitable para las actividades de la vida diaria:una perspectiva de género. Rev Esp Geriatr Gerontol 2003, 38(6):327-333.
• [25]Fayers PM, Machin D: Quality of life: assessment, analysis and interpretation. UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, West Sussex; 2000.
• [26]Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D: Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol 1993, 46:1417-1432.
• [27]Cohen J: A power primer. Psychol Bull 1992, 112:155-159.
• [28]Wyrwich KW, Tierney WM, Wolinsky FD: Using the standard error of measurement to identify important change on Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire. Qual Life Res 2002, 11:1-7.
• [29]Hokoishi K, Ikeda M, Maki N, et al.: Interrater reliability of the Physical Self-Maintenance Scale and the Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Scale in a variety of health professional representatives. Aging and Mental Health 2001, 5:38-40.
• [30]Tong A, Man D: The Validation of the Hong Kong Chinese Version of the Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Scale for Institutionalized Elderly Persons; OTJR. Occupation, Participation and Health 2002, 22(4):132.