The Validation of the Hong Kong Chinese Version of the Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Scale for Institutionalized Elderly Persons

Abstract

The Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) scale is the assessment tool most commonly used by occupational therapists in Hong Kong. However, there has been no cross-cultural validation study of the Lawton IADL-Chinese Version (IADL-CV) scale as applied to Hong Kong's older adults. This was the first study of content validity, construct validity, and reliability of the Lawton IADL-CV. A total of 155 institutionalized older adults were recruited from three different hostels and one care-and-attention home by using a convenience sampling method. Expert panel review and pilot testing on the subjects established the linguistic and content validity of the Hong Kong Chinese version. The content of the scale, the scoring criteria, translation, and level of rating scale were examined. It was shown that all nine IADL items apart from “handyman work” were culturally relevant (more than 78% agreement). Nine items altogether had good representation in assessing the IADL ability of Hong Kong older adults (73% agreement). The scoring criteria were refined with reference to the local culture. Both panel review and the related psychometric properties supported the change of the level of rating scale from a three-point to a four-point scale. The inter-rater and test-retest reliability estimated by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) gave a value of 0.99 and 0.90, respectively. The Cronbach's alpha estimating the internal consistency was 0.86. In the study of the construct validity, the factor analysis and known-groups methods were used. The construct validity was examined by factor analysis of the Lawton IADL scores of 111 hostel subjects. The result showed that one factor was extracted from the nine items of the Lawton IADL-CV scale. The known-groups method was performed using the Lawton IADL-CV to separate 146 institutionalized subjects into their corresponding living institutions: hostel or care-and-attention home. An overall prediction ability of 78% was achieved so as to correctly discriminate between residents in the hostel and care-and-attention home. In conclusion, the Lawton IADL-CV scale is a valid and reliable instrument to assess the older adults' IADL ability to live independently in the community.

Keywords

community rehabilitation validation outcome measure screening tool

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American College of Physicians. (1988). Position paper: Comprehensive functional assessment for elderly patients. Annals of Internal Medicine, July, 70–72.

Anastasi

, & Urbina

(1997). Psychological testing (7th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Avlund

Schultz-Larsen

, & Kreiner

(1993). The measurement of instrumental ADL: Content validity and construct validity. Aging Clinical Experimental Research, 5, 371–383.

Bowling

(1997). Research methods in health: Investigating health and health services. Great Britain: Redwood Books.

Census and Statistics Department. (1997). Hong Kong Population Projections 1997–2016 (p. 48). Hong Kong: Hong Kong Government Publication.

Chong

K.H.

(1995). Measurement of instrumental activities of daily living in stroke. Stroke, 26, 1119–1122.

Clark

D.O.

Stump

T.E.

, & Wolinsky

F.D.

(1997). A race- and gender-specific replication of five dimensions of functional limitation and disability. Journal of Aging and Health, 9(1), 28–42.

Clark

L.A.

, & Watson

(1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale development. Psychological Assessment, 7, 309–319.

Doble

S.E.

, & Fisher

A.G.

(1998). The dimensionality and validity of the Older Americans Resources and Services (OARS) Activities of daily living. Journal of Outcome Measurement, 2(1), 4–24.

10.

Duke University Center for the Study of Aging. (1978). Multidimensional functional assessment: The OARS methodology (2nd ed.). Durham, NC: Duke University.

11.

Feinstein

A.R.

Josephy

B.R.

, & Wells

C.K.

(1986). Scientific and clinical problems in indexes of functional disability. Annals of Internal Medicine, 105, 413–420.

12.

Fillenbaum

G.G.

(1985). Screening the elderly: A brief instrumental activities of daily living measure. Journal of the American Geriatric Society, 33, 698–706.

13.

Fillenbaum

G.G.

(1988). Multidimensional functional assessment of older adults: The Duke older American resources and services procedures. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

14.

Fitzgerald

J.F.

Smith

D.M.

Martin

D.K.

Freedman

J.A.

, & Wolinsky

F.D.

(1993). Replication of the multidimensionality of activities of daily living. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 48(1), S28–S31.

15.

Foti

Pedretti

L.W.

, & Lillie

S.M.

(1996). Activities of daily living. In Pedretti

L.W.

(Ed.), Occupational therapy: Practice skills for physical dysfunction (4th ed., pp. 463–506). St. Louis: Mosby.

16.

Hair

J.F.

Anderson

R.E.

Tatham

R.L.

, & Black

W.C.

(1998). Multivariate analysis. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

17.

Haynes

S.N.

Richard

C.S.

, & Kubany

E.S.

(1995). Content validity in psychological assessment: A functional approach to concepts and methods. Psychological Assessment, 7, 238–247.

18.

Hong Kong Government. (1994). Report of the working group on the care of the elderly. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Government Publication.

19.

Hsiao

S.H.

Chiu

H.C.

, & Liu

H.W.

(1994). A replication of multidimensionality of activities of daily living (ADL) on the elderly in southern Taiwan. Kaohsiung Journal of Medical Science, 10, 449–457.

20.

Iwarsson

, & Isacsson

(1997). On scaling methodology and environmental influences in disability assessments: The cumulative structure of personal and instrumental ADL among older adults in a Swedish rural district. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 64, 240–251.

21.

Kovar

M.G.

, & Lawton

M.P.

(1994). Functional disability: Activities and instrumental activities of daily living. Annual review of gerontology and geriatrics. Focus on Assessment Techniques, V(14), 57–75.

22.

Law

Cooper

B.A.

Strong

Stewart

Rigby

, & Letts

(1997). Theoretical contexts for the practice of occupational therapy. In Christian

C.H.

& Baum

C.M.

(Eds.), Occupational therapy: Enabling function and well-being (pp. 557–573). Thorofare, NJ: Slack Incorporated.

23.

Lawton

M.P.

(1988). Scales to measure competence in everyday activities. Psychopharmacology Bulletin, 24, 609–614.

24.

Lawton

M.P.

, & Brody

E.M.

(1969). Assessment of older people: Self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist, 9, 179–186.

25.

Lawton

M.P.

Moss

Fulcomer

, & Kleban

M.H.

(1982). A research and service-oriented multilevel assessment instrument. Journal of Gerontology, 37, 91–99.

26.

Lord

F.M.

(1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

27.

Lynn

M.R.

(1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research, 35, 382–385.

28.

Nunnally

J.C.

, & Bernstein

I.H.

(1994). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw Hill.

29.

Park

(1998). Enhancing performance of instrumental activities of daily living. In Gillen

& Burkhardt

(Eds.), Stroke rehabilitation: A function based approach (pp. 353–364). St. Louis: Mosby.

30.

Portney

L.G.

, & Watkins

M.P.

(1993). Foundations of clinical research: Applications to practice. Norwark, CT: Appleton & Lange.

31.

Spector

W.D.

, & Fleishman

J.A.

(1998). Combining activities of daily living with instrumental activities of daily living to measure functional disability. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 53b(1), S46–S57.

32.

Thomas

V.S.

Rockwood

, & McDowell

(1998). Multi-dimensionality in instrumental and basic activities of daily living. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51, 315–321.

33.

Trombly

C.A.

(1995). Occupational therapy for physical dysfunction (4th ed.). Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.

34.

Wiener

J.M.

Hanley

R.J.

Clark

, & Nostrand

J.F.V.

(1990). Measuring the activities of daily living: Comparisons across national surveys. Journal of Gerontology, 45, S229–237.

35.

Wolinsky

F.D.

, & Johnson

R.J.

(1991). The use of health services by older adults. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 46, S345–S357.

36.

Zimmer

J.G.

Rothenberg

B.M.

, & Andresen

E.M.

(1997). Functional assessment. In Andresen

Rothenberg

, & Zimmer

J.G.

(Eds.), Assessing the health status of older adults. New York: Springer Publishing; 1997.