OBJECTIVE: To investigate the level of agreement of the behavioural mapping method with an accelerometer to measure physical activity of hospitalized patients. DESIGN: A prospective single-centre observational study. SETTING: A university medical centre in the Netherlands. SUBJECTS: Patients admitted to the hospital. MAIN MEASURES: Physical activity of participants was measured for one day from 9 AM to 4 PM with the behavioural mapping method and an accelerometer simultaneously. The level of agreement between the percentages spent lying, sitting and moving from both measures was evaluated using the Bland-Altman method and by calculating Intraclass Correlation Coefficients. RESULTS: In total, 30 patients were included. Mean (±SD) age was 63.0 (16.8) years and the majority of patients were men (n = 18). The mean percentage of time (SD) spent lying was 47.2 (23.3) and 49.7 (29.8); sitting 42.6 (20.5) and 40.0 (26.2); and active 10.2 (6.1) and 10.3 (8.3) according to the accelerometer and observations, respectively. The Intraclass Correlation Coefficient and mean difference (SD) between the two measures were 0.852 and -2.56 (19.33) for lying; 0.836 and 2.60 (17.72) for sitting; and 0.782 and -0.065 (6.23) for moving. The mean difference between the two measures is small (⩽2.6%) for all three physical activity levels. On patient level, the variation between both measures is large with differences above and below the mean of ⩾20% being common. CONCLUSION: The overall level of agreement between the behavioural mapping method and an accelerometer to identify the physical activity levels 'lying', 'sitting' and 'moving' of hospitalized patients is reasonable.
DOCUMENT
Background. Adequate and user-friendly instruments for assessing physical function and disability in older adults are vital for estimating and predicting health care needs in clinical practice. The Late-Life Function and Disability Instrument Computer Adaptive Test (LLFDICAT) is a promising instrument for assessing physical function and disability in gerontology research and clinical practice. Objective. The aims of this study were: (1) to translate the LLFDI-CAT to the Dutch language and (2) to investigate its validity and reliability in a sample of older adults who spoke Dutch and dwelled in the community. Design. For the assessment of validity of the LLFDI-CAT, a cross-sectional design was used. To assess reliability, measurement of the LLFDI-CAT was repeated in the same sample. Methods. The item bank of the LLFDI-CAT was translated with a forward-backward procedure. A sample of 54 older adults completed the LLFDI-CAT, World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0, RAND 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey physical functioning scale (10 items), and 10-Meter Walk Test. The LLFDI-CAT was repeated in 2 to 8 days (mean4.5 days). Pearson’s r and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) (2,1) were calculated to assess validity, group-level reliability, and participant-level reliability. Results. A correlation of .74 for the LLFDI-CAT function scale and the RAND 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey physical functioning scale (10 items) was found. The correlations of the LLFDI-CAT disability scale with the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 and the 10-Meter Walk Test were .57 and .53, respectively. The ICC (2,1) of the LLFDI-CAT function scale was .84, with a group-level reliability score of .85. The ICC (2,1) of the LLFDI-CAT disability scale was .76, with a group-level reliability score of .81. Limitations. The high percentage of women in the study and the exclusion of older adults with recent joint replacement or hospitalization limit the generalizability of the results. Conclusions. The Dutch LLFDI-CAT showed strong validity and high reliability when used to assess physical function and disability in older adults dwelling in the community.
MULTIFILE
The Kennedy Axis V is a routine outcome measurement instrument which can assist the assessment of the short-term risk for violence and other adverse patient outcomes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the interrater reliability and clinical utility of the instrument when used by mental health nurses in daily care of patients with mental illness. This cross-sectional study was conducted in inpatient and outpatient adult psychiatric care units and in one adolescent inpatient unit at a university hospital in the Netherlands. Interrater reliability was measured based on the independent scores of two different nurses for the same patients. The clinical utility of the instrument was evaluated by means of a clinical utility questionnaire. To gain a deeper understanding of rating difficulties at the adolescent unit, additional data were collected in two focus group interviews. The overall results revealed a substantial level of agreement between nurses (intraclass correlation coefficient and Pearson 0.79). Some rating challenges were identified, including difficulties with scoring the instrument and using tailor-made interventions related to the scores. These challenges can be resolved using refined training and implementation strategies. When the Kennedy Axis V is accompanied by a solid implementation strategy in adult mental health care, the instrument can be used for short-term risk assessment and thereby contribute in efforts to reduce violence, suicide, self-harm, severe selfneglect, and enhanced objectivity in clinical decision-making.
DOCUMENT
