Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2025
Validation of Spatial Orientation Screening questionnaire for use in memory clinic patients.
СтатьяВалидационное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tangen Gro Gujord, Engedal Knut, Persson Karin, Selbæk Geir, Dakhil Shams, McArdle Riona, Mjørud Marit, Røsvik Janne, Mengshoel Anne Marit, Knapskog Anne Brita
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Spatial orientation is required for independent mobility in society. Deficits in spatial orientation can be an early symptom of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias, and there is a need for brief assessment tools to identify impairments.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the construct and known-group validity of our newly developed Spatial Orientation Screening (SOS) questionnaire.
METHODS: We included 132 patients with subjective cognitive decline (n = 16), mild cognitive impairment (n = 32), or all-cause dementia (n = 84) from a memory clinic and a reference group of cognitively unimpaired older adults (n = 108). The patients and their next-of-kin answered the self- and proxy-rated versions of the 4-item SOS (0-8 points) and the 10-item Questionnaire of Everyday Navigational Ability (QuENA, 0-30 points). The patients also performed the Floor Maze Test (FMT) for performance-based spatial abilities.
RESULTS: Mean ages (SD) of the patient and reference groups were 68.6 (±7.6) years and 73.7 (±6.7) years, respectively. Construct validity between self-rated versions of the SOS and QuENA was satisfactory with rs = 0.66, between the proxy-rated versions rs = 0.61, and between the proxy-reported SOS and FMT rs = 0.49 (all p < 0.001). Known-group validity was also acceptable, with significantly higher median (IQR) SOS self-reported scores in patients 1.0 (2.0) compared to the reference group 0.2 (0.5) points, (p < 0.001). Informants reported more severe impairments compared to the patients' self-reports on both SOS and QuENA (both p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The SOS had satisfactory validity for use as a screening instrument for assessment of spatial orientation in memory clinic patients.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the construct and known-group validity of our newly developed Spatial Orientation Screening (SOS) questionnaire.
METHODS: We included 132 patients with subjective cognitive decline (n = 16), mild cognitive impairment (n = 32), or all-cause dementia (n = 84) from a memory clinic and a reference group of cognitively unimpaired older adults (n = 108). The patients and their next-of-kin answered the self- and proxy-rated versions of the 4-item SOS (0-8 points) and the 10-item Questionnaire of Everyday Navigational Ability (QuENA, 0-30 points). The patients also performed the Floor Maze Test (FMT) for performance-based spatial abilities.
RESULTS: Mean ages (SD) of the patient and reference groups were 68.6 (±7.6) years and 73.7 (±6.7) years, respectively. Construct validity between self-rated versions of the SOS and QuENA was satisfactory with rs = 0.66, between the proxy-rated versions rs = 0.61, and between the proxy-reported SOS and FMT rs = 0.49 (all p < 0.001). Known-group validity was also acceptable, with significantly higher median (IQR) SOS self-reported scores in patients 1.0 (2.0) compared to the reference group 0.2 (0.5) points, (p < 0.001). Informants reported more severe impairments compared to the patients' self-reports on both SOS and QuENA (both p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The SOS had satisfactory validity for use as a screening instrument for assessment of spatial orientation in memory clinic patients.