Search

Dementia is a syndrome characterized by cognitive and neuropsychiatric symptoms associated with progressive functional decline (FD). FD is a core diagnostic criterion for dementia, setting the threshold between its prodromal stages and the full-blown disease. The operationalization of FD continues to generate a great deal of controversy. For instance, the threshold of FD for the diagnosis of dementia varies across diagnostic criteria, supporting the need for standardization of this construct. Moreover, there is a need to reconsider how we are measuring FD to set boundaries between normal aging, mild cognitive impairment, and dementia. In this paper, we propose a multidimensional framework that addresses outstanding issues in the assessment of FD: i) What activities of daily living (ADLs) are necessary to sustain an independent living in aging? ii) How to assess FD in individuals with suspected neurocognitive disorders? iii) To whom is the assessment directed? and iv) How much does FD differentiate healthy aging from mild and major neurocognitive disorders? Importantly, the To Whom Question introduces a person-centered approach that regards patients and caregivers as active agents in the assessment process of FD. Thus, once impaired ADLs have been identified, patients can indicate how significant such impairments are for them in daily life. We envisage that this new framework will guide future strategies to enhance functional assessment and treatment of patients with dementia and their caregivers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective Traditional measures of cognitive abilities most used by neuropsychologists are generally low in ecological validity and only capture a small proportion of the variance of a person's true functional capacity. This study evaluates the association between clinic-based performance and parallel real-world completion of an everyday planning test, the Overnight Trip Task (OTT). Method A cross-sectional cohort of 65 community-dwelling older adults completed a battery of cognitive assessments and two formats of the OTT: the paper-and-pencil clinic OTT, which was completed remotely through video conferencing (Zoom), and the parallel real-world OTT (RW-OTT), which was completed at home between sessions. Both formats required participants to plan for what they would pack and prepare for a hypothetical overnight trip based on a provided story that included rules and embedded contingencies. Results The clinic OTT demonstrated a small-to-moderate relationship with the RW-OTT (r  = 0.35) and no relationship with measures of learning, long delay recall, an executive function composite, and a measure of everyday planning. Hierarchical regressions indicated that the clinic OTT demonstrated incremental validity above an executive function composite measure and global cognition when predicting self-reported everyday functioning and RW-OTT performance. Conclusions The clinic OTT showed only modest association with the RW-OTT and discriminate but not convergent validity was demonstrated. The clinic OTT showed incremental validity when predicting self-reported everyday functioning and RW-OTT performance above more traditional measures. Before the clinic OTT could be considered a reliable and valid clinic-based measure for predicting real-world behavior, additional research would be needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Older adults often spontaneously engage in compensatory strategies (CS) to support everyday task completion, but factors that influence success of chosen CS remain unclear. This study examines whether real-world prospective memory (PM) task completion is better predicted by CS count or a CS quality rating. Method: Seventy mid-life and older adult participants were presented four novel, real-world PM tasks via remote assessment and encouraged to use their typical CS. The examiner captured detailed information about planned CS at task presentation (T1) and utilized CS at follow-up testing (T2). From this information, count (CS Count; quantity of CS) and quality (CS Quality; rating of CS thoroughness and utility) scores were coded separately for the planned and utilized CS. PM task performance accuracy was also coded (PM Accuracy). Results: Hierarchical regressions revealed planned CS Count and Quality did not predict PM Accuracy. In contrast, the utilized CS Quality predicted a significant amount of PM Accuracy variance over and above CS Count, global cognition, and age (R2 =.47, ΔR2 =.24, ΔF = 29.36, p <.001, f2 =.45). Furthermore, utilized CS Quality accounted for a similar amount of variance in PM Accuracy when utilized CS Count was removed from the model. Conclusions: This study's CS coding system can capture and quantify the quality of strategies, which uniquely predicts real-world PM performance. This coding system may provide researchers with a nuanced CS measure and lead to improved CS interventions designed to support everyday PM performance, such as targeted CS trainings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]