Talk the talk and walk the walk. Evaluation of autonomy in aging and Alzheimer disease by simulating instrumental activities of daily living: the S-IADL
Fiche du document
14 septembre 2016
- handle: 10670/1.xtr3al
- hal: hal-01389676
- doi: 10.7717/peerj.2351
Ce document est lié à :
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.7717/peerj.2351
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ , info:eu-repo/semantics/OpenAccess
Mots-clés
Assessment Autonomy Daily living IADL Alzheimer disease -bio]/Neurons and Cognition [q-bio.NC]/Psychology and behavior -bio]/Human health and pathology/Psychiatrics and mental health -bio]/Neurons and Cognition [q-bio.NC]/Cognitive SciencesSujets proches
AssessmentCiter ce document
Véronique Quaglino et al., « Talk the talk and walk the walk. Evaluation of autonomy in aging and Alzheimer disease by simulating instrumental activities of daily living: the S-IADL », HAL-SHS : sciences de l'éducation, ID : 10.7717/peerj.2351
Métriques
Partage / Export
Résumé
Objective. The autonomy of individuals is linked to the achievement of instrumental activities of daily living that require complex behavior. In the elderly, the assessment of autonomy is usually based on questionnaires that have strong subjective constraints. Considering this fact, we tested elderly healthy adults and Alzheimer disease patients using a new measure, the S-IADL (Simulation of Instrumental Activities for Daily Living), to assess the ability to perform effectively activities of daily living. Method. The S-IADL shares many items with the well-known IADL questionnaire proposed by Lawton & Brody (1969). However, as opposed to the IADL, the assessment of autonomy is not based on the completion of a questionnaire but requires the realization or simulation of various activities of daily living. Eighty-three participants (69 healthy elderly, and 14 Alzheimer Disease patients) completed the IADL and performed the S-IADL assessment. Results. Results revealed that, like the IADL, the S-IADL is able to identify AD patients who are likely to encounter difficulties in performing everyday activities, and no major differences were found between the IADL and the S-IADL. Conclusions. We outlined some advantages for prefering, in certain situation, this new tool based on simulation of activities in functional evaluation. Finally, we discuss the main limits of the S-IADL that should be investigated prior to its utilization by clinicians. Subjects Neurology, Psychiatry and Psychology