Assessing Everyday Activities Across the Dementia Spectrum with the Amsterdam IADL Questionnaire

Cross-sectional and longitudinal assessments of function in prodromal-to-mild Alzheimer's disease: A comparison of the ADCS-ADL and A-IADL-Q scales

Introduction

Prior observational work in a heterogeneous cohort of participants with mild cognitive impairment suggests the Amsterdam Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Questionnaire (A-IADL-Q) may have greater sensitivity for functional decline than the more established Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living (ADCS-ADL) scale. However, the relative utility of the A-IADL-Q versus the ADCS-ADL for clinical trials in early Alzheimer's disease (AD) remains uncertain.

Methods

We compared baseline and longitudinal performance of the A-IADL-Q and ADCS-ADL in participants with biomarker-confirmed prodromal (pAD; n = 158) or mild (mAD; n = 283) AD enrolled in the 18-month Tauriel study of semorinemab (NCT03289143).

Results

The A-IADL-Q exhibited numerically stronger discrimination between pAD and mAD participants at baseline per Cohen's d analyses and similar sensitivity to longitudinal decline across cohorts over 18 months relative to the ADCS-ADL.

Discussion

The comparable performance of the ADCS-ADL and A-IADL-Q supports the utility of the A-IADL-Q in early AD clinical trials.

Highlights

The Amsterdam Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Questionnaire (A-IADL-Q) may be more sensitive than the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living Scale (ADCS-ADL) for distinguishing prodromal and mild Alzheimer's disease (AD).A-IADL-Q and ADCS-ADL are similarly sensitive to decline in early AD over 18 months.Comparable performance of these indices supports A-IADL-Q use in future AD trials.Additional AD clinical trial data could extend findings across more diverse cohorts.

Everyday Functioning in a Community-Based Volunteer Population: Differences Between Participant- and Study Partner-Report

Introduction: Impaired awareness in dementia caused by Alzheimer's disease and related disorders made study partner-report the preferred method of measuring interference in "instrumental activities of daily living" (IADL). However, with a shifting focus toward earlier disease stages and prevention, the question arises whether self-report might be equally or even more appropriate. The aim of this study was to investigate how participant- and study partner-report IADL perform in a community-based volunteer population without dementia and which factors relate to differences between participant- and study partner-report. Methods: Participants (N = 3,288; 18-97 years, 70.4% females) and their study partners (N = 1,213; 18-88 years, 45.8% females) were recruited from the Dutch Brain Research Registry. IADL were measured using the Amsterdam IADL Questionnaire. The concordance between participant- and study partner-reported IADL difficulties was examined using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Multinomial logistic regressions were used to investigate which demographic, cognitive, and psychosocial factors related to participant and study partner differences, by looking at the over- and underreport of IADL difficulties by the participant, relative to their study partner. Results: Most A-IADL-Q scores represented no difficulties for both participants (87.9%) and study partners (89.4%). The concordance between participants and study partners was moderate (ICC = 0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.51, 0.59]); 24.5% (N = 297) of participants overreported their IADL difficulties compared with study partners, and 17.8% (N = 216) underreported difficulties. The presence of depressive symptoms (odds ratio [OR] = 1.31, 95% CI = [1.12, 1.54]), as well as memory complaints (OR = 2.45, 95% CI = [1.80, 3.34]), increased the odds of participants overreporting their IADL difficulties. Higher IADL ratings decreased the odds of participant underreport (OR = 0.71, 95% CI = [0.67, 0.74]). Conclusion: In this sample of community-based volunteers, most participants and study partners reported no major IADL difficulties. Differences between participant and study partner were, however, quite prevalent, with subjective factors indicative of increased report of IADL difficulties by the participant in particular. These findings suggest that self- and study partner-report measures may not be interchangeable, and that the level of awareness needs to be considered, even in cognitively healthy individuals.

Enhancing 'meaningfulness' of functional assessments: UK adaptation of the Amsterdam IADL questionnaire

OBJECTIVE

Commonly used measures of instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) do not capture activities for a technologically advancing society. This study aimed to adapt the proxy/informant-based Amsterdam IADL Questionnaire (A-IADL-Q) for use in the UK and develop a self-report version.

DESIGN

An iterative mixed method cross-cultural adaptation of the A-IADL-Q and the development of a self-report version involving a three-step design: (1) interviews and focus groups with lay and professional stakeholders to assess face and content validity; (2) a questionnaire to measure item relevance to older adults in the U.K.; (3) a pilot of the adapted questionnaire in people with cognitive impairment.

SETTING

Community settings in the UK.

PARTICIPANTS

One hundred and forty-eight participants took part across the three steps: (1) 14 dementia professionals; 8 people with subjective cognitive decline (SCD), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), or dementia due to Alzheimer's disease; and 6 relatives of people with MCI or dementia; (2) 92 older adults without cognitive impairment; and (3) 28 people with SCD or MCI.

MEASUREMENTS

The cultural relevance and applicability of the A-IADL-Q scale items were assessed using a 6-point Likert scale. Cognitive and functional performance was measured using a battery of cognitive and functional measures.

RESULTS

Iterative modifications to the scale resulted in a 55-item adapted version appropriate for UK use (A-IADL-Q-UK). Pilot data revealed that the new and revised items performed well. Four new items correlated with the weighted average score (Kendall's Tau -.388, -.445, -.497, -.569). An exploratory analysis of convergent validity found correlations in the expected direction with cognitive and functional measures.

CONCLUSION

The A-IADL-Q-UK provides a measurement of functional decline for use in the UK that captures culturally relevant activities. A new self-report version has been developed and is ready for testing. Further evaluation of the A-IADL-Q-UK for construct validity is now needed.

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Amsterdam Instrumental Activities of Daily Living questionnaire short version German for Switzerland

Background

Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) limitations are associated with reduced health-related quality of life for people with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). For these people, the assessment of IADL is crucial to the diagnostic process, as well as for the evaluation of new interventions addressing MCI. The Amsterdam IADL Questionnaire Short Version (A-IADL-Q-SV) is an established assessment tool with good psychometric properties that has been shown to be robust to cultural differences in Western countries. The aims of this study were to: (1) cross-culturally adapt and validate the A-IADL-Q-SV for the German-speaking population of Switzerland; (2) investigate its cultural comparability; and (3) evaluate further psychometric properties.

Methods

The A-IADL-Q-SV German was pretested on clinicians and participants in a memory clinic setting. The psychometric properties and cultural comparability of the questionnaire were investigated in memory clinic settings including participants with MCI or mild dementia, as well as participants with normal cognition recruited from the community. Item response theory (IRT) was applied to investigate measurement invariance by means of differential item functioning to assess item bias. Additionally, the test–retest reliability on scale level, the construct validity through hypothesis testing and the discriminant validity of the A-IADL-Q-SV German were evaluated.

Results

Ninety-six informants of participants with normal cognition, MCI or mild dementia completed the A-IADL-Q-SV German. The basic assumptions for IRT scoring were met. No meaningful differential item functioning for culture was detected between the Swiss and Dutch reference samples. High test–retest reliability on scale level (ICC 0.93; 95% CI 0.9–0.96) was found. More than 75% of the observed correlations between the A-IADL-Q-SV German and clinical measures of cognition and functional status were found to be in the direction and of the magnitude hypothesized. The A-IADL-Q-SV German was shown to be able to discriminate between participants with normal cognition and MCI, as well as MCI and mild dementia.

Conclusions

The A-IADL-Q-SV German is a psychometrically robust measurement tool for a Swiss population with normal cognition, MCI and mild dementia. Thus, it provides a valuable tool to assess IADL functioning in clinical practices and research settings in Switzerland.

Trial registration This study was registered retrospectively in July 2019 on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04012398).

The influence of diversity on the measurement of functional impairment: An international validation of the Amsterdam IADL Questionnaire in eight countries

INTRODUCTION

To understand the potential influence of diversity on the measurement of functional impairment in dementia, we aimed to investigate possible bias caused by age, gender, education, and cultural differences.

METHODS

A total of 3571 individuals (67.1 ± 9.5 years old, 44.7% female) from The Netherlands, Spain, France, United States, United Kingdom, Greece, Serbia, and Finland were included. Functional impairment was measured using the Amsterdam Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) Questionnaire. Item bias was assessed using differential item functioning (DIF) analysis.

RESULTS

There were some differences in activity endorsement. A few items showed statistically significant DIF. However, there was no evidence of meaningful item bias: Effect sizes were low (ΔR 2 range 0-0.03). Impact on total scores was minimal.

DISCUSSION

The results imply a limited bias for age, gender, education, and culture in the measurement of functional impairment. This study provides an important step in recognizing the potential influence of diversity on primary outcomes in dementia research.

Latent class analysis identifies functional decline with Amsterdam IADL in preclinical Alzheimer's disease

Introduction

Trials in Alzheimer's disease (AD) now include participants at the earliest stages to prevent further decline. However, the lack of tools sensitive to subtle functional changes in early-stage AD hinders the development of new therapies as it is difficult to prove their clinical relevance.

Methods

We assessed functional changes over three years in 289 elderly memory complainers from the Investigation of Alzheimer's Predictors in subjective memory complainers cohort using the Amsterdam Instrumental-Activities-of-Daily-Living questionnaire (A-IADL-Q).

Results

No overall functional decline related to AD imaging markers was evidenced. However, five distinct classes of A-IADL-Q trajectories were identified. The largest class (212 [73.4%]) had stable A-IADL-Q scores over 3 years. A second group (23 [8.0%]) showed a persistent functional decline, higher amyloid load (P = .0005), and lower education (P = .0392).

Discussion

The A-IADL-Q identified a subtle functional decline in asymptomatic at-risk AD individuals. This could have important implications in the field of early intervention in AD.