The Lille Apathy Rating Scale: Validation of a caregiver-based version
ABSTRACT Apathy is reported in 16.5% to 70% of Parkinson's disease (PD) patients. Our recently developed Lille Apathy Rating Scale (LARS) has been specifically validated for patient-based assessment of apathy in PD. The aim of the present study was to validate a caregiver-based version of the LARS. Sixty consecutive PD patients and their respective caregivers participated in the study. An informant-based version of the LARS (LARS-i) was developed to rate apathy via a caregiver-based structured interview. Apathy was also assessed in a patient-based interview using the LARS and the informant- and clinician-rated versions of the Apathy Evaluation Scale (AES). Cronbach's alpha and standardized alpha coefficients were 0.872 and 0.877, respectively, and the split-half reliability was 0.901 (revealing good internal consistency). The test-retest and inter-rater reliability values were 0.960 and 0.996, respectively. Criterion-related validity (according to an independent, expert diagnosis) was good. Scores on the LARS and the LARS-i were highly correlated. However, apathy was rated significantly more severely by the caregiver than by the patient. This difference was significantly higher for demented than nondemented PD patients. The LARS-i was seen to have excellent psychometric properties and appears to be valid for use in PD with respect to the patient-based LARS and the informant- and clinician-rated versions of the AES.
SourceAvailable from: Jorge Matías-Guiu[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Introduction. To date, no rating scales for detecting apathy in Parkinson's disease (PD) patients have been validated in Spanish. For this reason, the aim of this study was to validate a Spanish version of Lille apathy rating scale (LARS) in a cohort of PD patients from Spain. Participants and Methods. 130 PD patients and 70 healthy controls were recruited to participate in the study. Apathy was measured using the Spanish version of LARS and the neuropsychiatric inventory (NPI). Reliability (internal consistency, test-retest, and interrater reliability) and validity (construct, content, and criterion validity) were measured. Results. Interrater reliability was 0.93. Cronbach's α for LARS was 0.81. The test-retest correlation coefficient was 0.97. The correlation between LARS and NPI scores was 0.61. The optimal cutoff point under the ROC curve was -14, whereas the value derived from healthy controls was -11. The prevalence of apathy in our population tested by LARS was 42%. Conclusions. The Spanish version of LARS is a reliable and useful tool for diagnosing apathy in PD patients. Total LARS score is influenced by the presence of depression and cognitive impairment. However, both disorders are independent identities with respect to apathy. The satisfactory reliability and validity of the scale make it an appropriate instrument for screening and diagnosing apathy in clinical practice or for research purposes.01/2014; 2014:849834. DOI:10.1155/2014/849834
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: ABSTRACT Background: Neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) occur in people with dementia throughout disease course and across etiologies. NPS are associated with significant morbidities and hastened disease processes. Nevertheless, people with dementia are not systematically assessed for NPS in clinical settings. We review existing NPS measures for clinical and/or research purposes, and identify measurement gaps. Methods: We conducted a computerized search of peer-reviewed published studies of measures (January 1, 1980-December 1, 2013) using multiple search terms. Measures selected for review were in English, had adequate psychometric properties, and were developed for or used with people with dementia. Papers describing measures were evaluated by three coders along seven characteristics: behavioral domains, number of items, method of administration, response categories, targeted population, setting, and psychometric properties. Results: Overall, 2,233 papers were identified through search terms, and 36 papers from manual searches of references. From 2,269 papers, 85 measures were identified of which 45 (52.9%) had adequate psychometric properties and were developed or used with dementia populations. Of these, 16 (35.6%) were general measures that included a wide range of behaviors; 29 (64.4%) targeted specific behaviors (e.g. agitation). Measures differed widely as to behaviors assessed and measurement properties. Conclusions: A robust set of diverse measures exists for assessing NPS in different settings. No measures identify risk factors for behaviors or enable an evaluation of the context in which behaviors occur. To improve clinical efforts, research is needed to evaluate concordance of behavioral ratings between formal and informal caregivers, and to develop and test measures that can identify known risks for behaviors and the circumstances under which behaviors occur.International Psychogeriatrics 08/2014; 26(11):1-44. DOI:10.1017/S1041610214001537 · 1.89 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: ABSTRACT Background: There are several scales used to detect apathy in disease populations. Since apathy is a prevalent symptom in many neurodegenerative diseases, this is an especially important context in which to identify and compare scales. Aims: To provide an overview of apathy scales validated in generic and specific neurodegenerative disease populations, compare validation studies' methodological quality and the psychometric properties of the validated apathy scales. Methods: A systematic review of literature was conducted of articles published between 1980 and 2013. The final articles selected for review were rated on methodological quality and the psychometric properties of the scales used were interpreted. Results: Sixteen articles validating apathy scales were included in the review, five in a generic neurodegenerative sample and eleven in specific neurodegenerative samples. The methodological quality of specific studies varied from poor to excellent. The highest quality, which had psychometrically favorable scales, were the dementia apathy interview and rating (DAIR) and the apathy evaluation scale-clinical version (AES-C) in Alzheimer's disease and the Lille apathy rating scale (LARS) in Parkinson's disease. Generic neurodegenerative disease validation studies were of average methodological quality and yielded inconsistent psychometric properties. Conclusions: Several instruments can be recommended for use in some specific neurodegenerative diseases. Other instruments should either be validated or developed to assess apathy in more generic populations.International Psychogeriatrics 10/2014; DOI:10.1017/S1041610214002221 · 1.89 Impact Factor