周历活动规划中文版在社区中老年人执行功能评测中的信度和效度

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-9771.2021.06.017

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的

探究周历活动规划中文版(WCPA-C)在社区中老年人执行功能评测中的重测信度和区分效度。

方法

2020年7月至8月，共招募55例41~89岁的社区中老年人。使用WCPA-C对其中30例受试者进行3次评估，首次评估使用版本A，在间隔2周和4周后分别使用版本B和版本A进行重测，计算3次评估间的组内相关系数(ICC值)。根据蒙特利尔认知评估量表(MoCA)得分将受试者分为轻度认知功能障碍(MCI)组(n = 37)和认知正常(NC)组(n = 18)，比较两组WCPA-C结果。

结果

共26例受试者完成3次评估，4例在末次评估时失访。除计划时间外，第1、2次评估间的ICC值为0.43~0.78，第2、3次评估间，ICC值为0.50~0.80。MCI组与NC组比较，除总时间和计划时间外(Z < 1.641, P > 0.05)，其余指标均有显著性差异(Z > 1.288, P < 0.05)。

结论

WCPA-C在我国社区中老年人中具有满意的重测信度和区分效度。

关键词: 周历活动规划, 执行功能, 信度, 效度

Abstract: Objective

To examine the reliability and validity of a performance-based executive function assessment, the Chinese Version of Weekly Calendar Planning Activity (WCPA-C), in community-dwelling middle-aged and elderly adults.

Methods

From July to August, 2020, 55 community-dwelling adults aged 41 to 89 years participated in this study. A total of 30 participants were evaluated with the WCPA-C version A. After two weeks and four weeks, they were retested with version B and version A, respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated. All the participants were divided into the mild cognitive impairment (MCI) group (n = 37) and normal cognition (NC) group (n = 18) according to the scores of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). The results of WCPA-C between two groups were compared.

Results

There were four participants lost, and 26 participants completed all three tests. Except the planning time, the ICCs were 0.43~0.78 between the first and the second tests, and were 0.50~0.80 between the second and the third tests. WCPA-C results were significant different between two groups (Z > 1.288, P < 0.05), except the total time and the planning time (Z < 1.641, P > 0.05).

Conclusion

WCPA-C demonstrats satisfactory test-retest reliability and discriminative validity in community-dwelling middle-aged and elderly adults.

Key words: Weekly Calendar Planning Activity, executive function, reliability, validity

中图分类号:

R592

周兆雯,王翠,黄真. 周历活动规划中文版在社区中老年人执行功能评测中的信度和效度[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2021, 27(6): 737-744.

Zhao-wen ZHOU,Cui WANG,Zhen HUANG. Reliability and Validity of the Chinese Version of Weekly Calendar Planning Activity for Executive Function Assessment in Community-dwelling Middle-aged and Elderly Adults[J]. 《Chinese Journal of Rehabilitation Theory and Practice》, 2021, 27(6): 737-744.

图/表 4

图1

表1

表2

表3

参考文献 36

1	张欣悦. 我国人口老龄化的现状特点和发展趋势及其对策研究[J]. 中国管理信息化, 2020, 23(5): 195-199.
	ZHANG X Y. Chin Manag Inform, 2020, 23(5): 195-199.
2	YEGLA B, FOSTER T C, KUMAR A. Behavior model for assessing decline in executive function during aging and neurodegenerative diseases [J]. Methods Mol Biol, 2019, 2011: 441-449.
3	WEST R L. An application of prefrontal cortex function theory to cognitive aging [J]. Psychol Bull, 1996, 120(2): 272-292.
4	ROSADO-ARTALEJO C, CARNICERO J A, LOSA-REYNA J, et al. Global performance of executive function is predictor of risk of frailty and disability in older adults [J]. J Nutr Health Aging, 2017, 21(9): 980-987.
5	TOGLIA J, LAHAV O, BEN A E, et al. Adult age and cultural differences in performance on the Weekly Calendar Planning Activity (WCPA) [J]. Am J Occup Ther, 2017, 71(5): 7105270010p1-7105270010p8.
6	MELTZER E P, KAPOOR A, FOGEL J, et al. Association of psychological, cognitive, and functional variables with self-reported executive functioning in a sample of nondemented community-dwelling older adults [J]. Appl Neuropsychol Adult, 2017, 24(4): 364-375.
7	MANSBACH W E, MACE R A. Predicting functional dependence in mild cognitive impairment: differential contributions of memory and executive functions [J]. Gerontologist, 2019, 59(5): 925-935.
8	MCDOUGALL G J, HAN A, STAGGS V S, et al. Predictors of instrumental activities of daily living in community-dwelling older adults [J]. Arch Psychiatr Nurs, 2019, 33(5): 43-50.
9	LEVY L. Cognition Occupation and Participation Across the Life Span [M]. 4th edBetheseda, MD: AOTA Press, 2018: 29-49.
10	ALMUDENA J F, ESTEFANÍA G, JAVIER O R, et al. Role of executive functions in the conversion from mild cognitive impairment to dementia [J]. J Alzheimer Dis, 2020, 77(2): 641-653.
11	LAU K M, PARIKH M, HARVEY D J, et al. Early cognitively based functional limitations predict loss of independence in instrumental activities of daily living in older adults [J]. J Int Neuropsychol Soc, 2015, 21(9): 688-698.
12	Hørlyck L D, Obenhausen K, Jansari A, et al. Virtual reality assessment of daily life executive functions in mood disorders: associations with neuropsychological and functional measures [J]. J Affect Disord, 2021, 280(Pt A): 478-487.
13	MISKOWIAK K, BURDICK K, MARTINEZ-ARAN A, et al. Methodological recommendations for cognition trials in bipolar disorder by the International Society for Bipolar Disorders Targeting Cognition Task Force [J]. Bipolar Disord, 2017, 19(8): 614-626.
14	WALLISCH A, LITTLE L M, DEAN E, et al. Executive function measures for children: a scoping review of ecological validity [J]. OTJR (Thorofare N J), 2018, 38(1): 6-14.
15	NAOMI C, MAUREEN S E, ROBERT B. Improving the ecological validity of executive functioning assessment [J]. Arch Clin Neuropsychol, 2006, 21(3): 217-227.
16	IGNJATOVI V B, PAVI S, BUKUROV K G, et al. Behavioral aspects of executive functions in young adults with well-controlled epilepsy [J]. [ahead of print]. Psychol Health Med, 2020. doi: 10.1080/13548506.2020.1810719. doi: 10.1080/13548506.2020.1810719
17	SHWARTZ S K, ROPER B L, ARENTSEN T J, et al. The Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function^® -Adult Version is related to emotional distress, not executive dysfunction, in a Veteran sample [J]. Arch Clin Neuropsychol, 2020, 35(6):701-716.
18	SAMUELS J, BIENVENU O J, KRASNOW J, et al. Self-reported executive function and hoarding in adults with obsessive-compulsive disorder [J]. Compr Psychiatry, 2018, 81: 53-59.
19	HOLDEN S K, MEDINA L D, HOYT B, et al. Validation of a performance-based assessment of cognitive functional ability in Parkinson's disease [J]. Mov Disord, 2018, 33(11): 1760-1768.
20	MIRZA M, GECHT-SILVER M, KEATING E, et al. Feasibility and preliminary efficacy of an occupational therapy intervention for older adults with chronic conditions in a primary care clinic [J]. Am J Occup Ther, 2020, 74(5): 7405205030p1-7405205030p13.
21	American Occupational Therapy Association.Occupational Therapy Practice Framework: Domain and Process: fourth edition [J]. Am J Occup Ther, 2020, 74(): 7412410010.
22	TOGLIA J. Weekly Calendar Planning Activity. A Performance Test of Executive Function [M]. Betheseda, MD: AOTA Press, 2015: 1-8.
23	GOVEROVER Y, TOGLIA J, DELUCA J. The Weekly Calendar Planning Activity in multiple sclerosis: a top-down assessment of executive functions [J]. Neuropsychol Rehabil, 2020, 30(7): 1372-1387.
24	ZLOTNIK S, SCHIFF A, RAVID S, et al. A new approach for assessing executive functions in everyday life, among adolescents with Genetic Generalised Epilepsies [J]. Neuropsychol Rehabil, 2020, 30(2): 333-345.
25	LAHAV O, BEN-SIMON A, INBAR-WEISS N, et al. Weekly Calendar Planning Activity for university students: comparison of individuals with and without ADHD by Gender [J]. J Attent Disord, 2018, 22(4): 368-378.
26	TOGLIA J, BERG C. Performance-based measure of executive function: comparison of community and at-risk youth [J]. Am J Occup Ther, 2013, 67(5): 515-523.
27	怀宝玉,王翠,黄真,等. 周历活动规划中文版在大学生执行功能评测中的信度[J]. 中国康复理论与实践, 2020, 26(3): 363-367.
	HUAI B Y, WANG C, HUANG Z, et al. Reliability of Chinese Version of Weekly Calendar Planning Activity for an executive function assessment in college students [J]. Chin J Rehabil Theory Pract, 2020, 26(3): 363-367.
28	VINCENT A S, ROEBUCK-SPENCER T M, FUENZALIDA E, et al. Test-retest reliability and practice effects for the ANAM General Neuropsychological Screening Battery [J]. Clin Neuropsychol, 2018, 32(3): 479-494.
29	CIESIELSKA N, SOKOŁOWSKI R, MAZUR E, et al. Is the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) test better suited than the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) detection among people aged over 60? Meta-analysis [J]. Psychiatria Polska, 2016, 50(5): 1039-1052.
30	TIMONTHY J W. Functional Cognition and Occupational Therapy [M]. Betheseda, MD: AOTA Press, 2019: 76-77.
31	GILES G M, EDWARDS D F, BAUM C, et al. Making functional cognition a professional priority [J]. Am J Occup Ther, 2020, 74(1): 7401090010p1-7401090010p6.
32	HOLMQVIST K L, HOLMEFUR M, ARVIDSSON P. Test-retest reliability of the Swedish version of the Weekly Calendar Planning Activity: a performance-based test of executive functioning [J]. Disabil Rehabil, 2020, 42(18): 2647-2652.
33	PORTNEY L G. Foundations of Clinical Research: Applications to Practice [M]. 4th ed. Piladelphia, PA, F. A.: Davis Company, 2020: 91.
34	CACCIAMANI F, SALVADORI N, EUSEBI P, et al. Evidence of practice effect in CANTAB Spatial Working Memory Test in a cohort of patients with mild cognitive impairment [J]. Appl Neuropsychol Adult, 2018, 25(3): 237-248.
35	LAHAV O, KATZ N. Independent older adult's IADL and executive function according to cognitive performance [J]. OTJR (Thorofare N J), 2020, 40(3): 183-189.
36	KIM S, KANG Y, YU K H, et al. Disproportionate decline of executive functions in early mild cognitive impairment, late mild cognitive impairment, and mild Alzheimer's disease [J]. Dement Neurocogn Disord, 2016, 15(4):159-164.

项目	第1次	第2次	第3次
安排填写数	15.00 (16.00, 14.00)	15.00 (16.00, 13.00)	16.00 (16.00, 13.00)
准确数	6.00 (9.00, 4.75)	5.50 (11.00, 4.00)	7.50 (10.50, 5.00)
总时间(s)	1281.50 (1704.75, 1016.75)	1184.00 (1622.50, 867.75)	1147.00 (1397.50, 905.75)
计划时间(s)	32.00 (82.50 , 17.25)	47.50 (80.50, 27.25)	27.00 (50.25, 13.50)
策略使用数	4.00 (5.00, 2.75)	3.00 (5.00, 2.00)	3.50 (5.00, 2.75)
遵守规则数^a	3.00 (4.00, 2.00)	4.00 (4.25, 3.00)	4.00 (5.00, 3.00)

项目	第1、2次评估		第2、3次评估
项目	ICC值	95%CI	ICC值	95%CI
安排填写数	0.43^a	0.06~0.70	0.54^a	0.20~0.76
准确数	0.77^a	0.56~0.89	0.75^a	0.51~0.88
总时间(s)	0.78^a	0.57~0.90	0.50^a	0.15~0.74
计划时间(s)	-0.08	-0.45~0.31	0.00	-0.38~0.38
策略使用数	0.70^a	0.44~0.85	0.80^a	0.60~0.91
遵守规则数	0.52^a	0.17~0.75	0.65^a	0.36~0.83

项目	MCI组(n = 37)	NC组(n = 18)	Z值	P值
安排填写数	14.00 (16.00~12.00)	15.00 (16.00~15.00)	2.098	0.036
准确数	5.00 (7.00~3.00)	10.00 (13.00~7.00)	4.054	< 0.001
总时间(s)	1294.00 (1707.50~1036.00)	1081.50 (1453.50~878.25)	-1.614	0.106
计划时间(s)	43.00 (90.00~15.50)	30.00 (41.50~17.00)	-1.288	0.198
策略使用数	3.00 (3.00~2.00)	4.00 (5.00~3.00)	2.324	0.020
遵守规则数	3.00 (4.00~2.00)	4.00 (5.00~3.00)	2.737	0.006

[1]	宋以玲, 任园春, 朱飞龙, 匡冬青, 曹庆久, 林杨, 王芳. 注意缺陷多动障碍儿童粗大动作技能与执行功能发展的特点及关系[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2024, 30(1): 1-9.
[2]	闻嘉宁, 金秋艳, 张琦, 李杰, 司琦. 认知参与型身体活动对发展儿童青少年执行功能的效果：基于ICF的系统综述[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2024, 30(1): 44-53.
[3]	王俊宇, 杨永, 袁逊, 谢婷, 庄洁. 高强度间歇训练对健康儿童青少年执行功能效果的系统综述[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2023, 29(9): 1012-1020.
[4]	耿立蒙, 刘聪聪, 李玲, 吕攀攀, 王鑫, 刘芳. 运用心理教育量表(第3版)评估孤独症谱系障碍儿童心理行为特征[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2023, 29(9): 1035-1039.
[5]	易琦峰, 黄卓尔, 杨国莉, 谢丽华, 谢胜锋, 吴小霞, 严谨. 在职医护人员呼吸康复培训知识需求问卷的编制及信度、效度检验[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2023, 29(8): 985-992.
[6]	李俊毅, 陈泽华, 吴祖贵, 王毅, 李聪聪, 王帅, 陈伟健, 叶子璇, 沈星星, 向瑞安, 刘文刚, 许学猛. 超声回声强度评价膝骨关节炎患者股四头肌质量的信度[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2023, 29(6): 738-744.
[7]	邱晓, 凌骏麒, 从洋洋, 白玉龙. 3D扫描容积法评定上肢远端体积的信度和效度[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2023, 29(3): 364-367.
[8]	沈星星, 熊玉玲, 陈伟健, 李聪聪, 李俊毅, 王帅, 章家皓, 向瑞安, 陈佳浩, 刘文刚, 许学猛. 慢性颈痛患者颈肩部肌肉性能差异及其与疼痛、体质量指数的相关性[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2023, 29(12): 1420-1428.
[9]	王宇, 贺刚, 黎东升, 马恺悦, 王超. 身体活动干预儿童青少年执行功能效果的系统综述[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2023, 29(1): 20-29.
[10]	陈婷婷,钟晓珂,温柔. 舞蹈活动改善儿童认知功能的系统综述[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2022, 28(8): 889-896.
[11]	杨佳曼,王毅,毛志涛,刘通,范德辉. 足姿指数评价青少年特发性脊柱侧弯患者足部位置的信度[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2022, 28(8): 909-913.
[12]	谭茗丹,冯锭瑶,陈曦,刘汉军,李咏雪. 中文版构音障碍影响程度量表对帕金森病患者的信度和效度[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2022, 28(6): 696-703.
[13]	陈小明,梁冠军,李明娣,王庆娟,苏敏. 有氧运动对注意缺陷多动障碍儿童核心症状和执行功能的影响[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2022, 28(6): 704-709.
[14]	元晓霞,钟晓珂,杨源,蒋长好. 运动表象训练改善老年人执行功能和运动功能的系统综述[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2021, 27(6): 661-667.
[15]	吴炜,倪波业,施加加. 扩展Barthel指数在脑卒中患者中的信度与效度[J]. 《中国康复理论与实践》, 2021, 27(3): 261-268.