Validation study of the Italian version of Communication Activities of the Daily Living (CADL 2) as an ecologic cognitive assessment measure in older subjects
- 66 Downloads
Communication can be affected by age related cognitive decline and mental deterioration. The second edition of the Communication Activities of the Daily Living (CADL 2) appears as an interesting ecological assessment tool of cognitive functions in old age.
The aim of this work is to (1) develop an Italian version of CADL 2, (2) to test its psychometric properties in terms of reliability and validity, and (3) to measure CADL 2 discriminative capacity between cognitively healthy and cognitively impaired older subjects.
One hundred and eleven subjects were enrolled (36 M; 75 F, age 80, 80.85 ± 7 years, education 9.3 ± 4.7 years). The CADL 2 was administered together with a standard neuropsychological battery.
The CADL 2 showed good reliability and correlates with all the cognitive evaluation tests. The CADL 2’s area under the curve was equal to 0.80, index of good diagnostic accuracy.
The CADL 2 is an appropriate assessment tool for communication skills in aging.
KeywordsEcological evaluation Communication Daily life Assessment Oldest old Aging
The authors acknowledge the physicians and the psychologist who collaborated with the Gerontological and Geriatric Session at the Department of the University of Medicine in Perugia. Thanks also to the speech therapist Dr. Simone Timi who contributed to collect informations on CADL 2.
Compliance with ethical standards
The present study was performed in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration. All participants gave their informed consent to participate.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
- 5.Nussbaum JF, Baringer DK (2000) Message production across the life span: communication and aging. Communication Theory 10(2):200–209. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2000.tb00189.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Vigorelli P (ed) (2004) La conversazione possibile con il malato Alzheimer, vol 48. FrancoAngeliGoogle Scholar
- 10.Sobhani Rad D (2014) A review on adult pragmatic assessments. Iran J Neurol 13(3):113–118Google Scholar
- 11.Bambini V, Arcara G, Aiachini B, Cattani B, Dichiarante ML, Moro A, Cappa SF, Pistarini C (2017) Assessing functional communication: validation of the Italian versions of the Communication Outcome after Stroke (COAST) scales for speakers and caregivers. Aphasiology 31(3):332–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Pigliautile M, Tiberio L, Mecocci P, Federici S (2012) The geriatrician. Assistive technology assessment handbook; (Rehabilitation science in practice series). CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 269–299Google Scholar
- 14.Zanini S, Bryan K, De Luca G, Bava A (2005) The effects of age and education on pragmatic features of verbal communication: evidence from the Italian version of the Right Hemisphere Language Battery (I-RHLB). Aphasiology 19(12):1107–1133. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687030500268977 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Pigliautile M, Ricci M, Ercolani S, Radicchi R, Mangialasche F, Monastero R et al (2012) Studio di validazione dell’ACE-R in lingua italiana nella popolazione degli young-old e degli old-old. G GERONTOL 60:134–141Google Scholar
- 17.Sbordone R J (1996) Ecological validity: some critical issues for the neuropsychologistGoogle Scholar
- 18.Franzen MD, Wilhelm KL (1996) Conceptual foundations of ecological validity in neuropsychological assessment. In: Sbordone RJ, Long CJ (eds) Ecological validity of neuropsychological testing. Gr Press/St Lucie Press, Inc, Delray Beach, pp 91–112Google Scholar
- 20.Holland AL, Frattali C, & Fromm D (1999) Communication activities of daily living: CADL-2. Pro-Ed.Google Scholar
- 21.Albert MS, DeKosky ST, Dickson D et al (2011) The diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer’s disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement 7(3):270–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2011.03.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.McKhann GM, Knopman DS, Chertkow H et al (2011) The diagnosis of dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement 7(3):263–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalz.2011.03.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Holland AL (1980) CADL communicative abilities in daily living: a test of functional communication for aphasic adults. University Park PressGoogle Scholar
- 24.Pizzamiglio L, Laicardi L, Appicciafuoco A et al (1984) Capacità comunicative di pazienti afasici in situazioni di vita quotidiana: Adattamento italiano. Arch Psicol Neurol Psichiatr XLV:187–210Google Scholar
- 25.Evers A, Muñiz J, Hagemeister C, Høstmælingen A et al (2013) Assessing the quality of tests: revision of the EFPA review model. Psicothema 25(3):283–291Google Scholar
- 27.McDowell I, Newell C (1996) Introduction. In: McDowell I, Newell C (eds) Measuring health–a guide to rating scales and questionnaires. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 3–46Google Scholar
- 29.Bosco FM, Parola A, Angeleri R, Galetto V, Zettin M, Gabbatore I (2018) Improvement of communication skills after traumatic brain injury: the efficacy of the cognitive pragmatic treatment program using the communicative activities of daily living. Arch Clin Neuropsy 33(7):875–888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 35.Rousseaux M, Sève A, Vallet M, Pasquier F, Mackowiak-Cordoliani MA (2010) An analysis of communication in conversation in patients with dementia. Neuropsych 48(13):3884–3890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.09.026 CrossRefGoogle Scholar