Background. Occupational therapists are frequently asked to document the interplay between individuals' neuropsychological deficits and the requirements of their daily lives. Purpose. The present study was designed to develop and validate a measure of independence in everyday functioning that considers recent advances in research regarding the ecological assessment of executive functions. Method. Experts (n=8) judged the IADL Profile's content validity and the tool was pilot tested with the target population (n=8). To document the tool's reliability, 30 patients aged 16 to 65 with moderate or severe TBI were recruited. A trained examiner administered the IADL Profile, and three trained judges rated video recordings on two occasions. Results. An eight-task (29-item) test was developed. Comparing ratings of four raters, 95 percent of kappa coefficients indicated moderate to almost perfect agreement, and 94% showed almost perfect intrarater agreement. Implications. The IADL Profile provides occupational therapists with a set of measures of IADL independence with strong preliminary evidence of reliability.
ArnadottirG. (1990). The brain and behavior: Assessing cortical dysfunction through activities of daily living. St. Louis, MO: The C.V. Mosby Company.
2.
AshleyM. J., PerselC. S., & ClarkM. C. (2001). Validation of an independent living scale for post-acute rehabilitation applications. Brain Injury, 15, 435–442. doi: 10.1080/02699050010005896
3.
BaumC. M., ConnorL. T., MorrisonT., HahnM., DromerickA. W., & EdwardsD. F. (2008). Reliability, validity, and clinical utility of the Executive Function Performance Test: A measure of executive function in a sample of people with stroke. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 62, 446–455.
4.
BensonJ., & ClarkF. (1982). A guide for instrument development and validation. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 36, 789–799.
5.
BottariC. (2001). Perception of experts on criteria for the assessment of the “dysexecutive syndrome” in everyday activities. Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec.
6.
BottariC., DassaC., RainvilleC., & DutilE. (2009a). The criterion-related validity of the IADL Profile with measures of executive functions, indices of trauma severity and socio-demographic characteristics. Brain Injury, 23, 322–335. doi: 10.1080/02699050902788436
7.
BottariC., DassaC., RainvilleC., & DutilE. (2009b). The factorial validity and internal consistency of the Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Profile in individuals with a traumatic brain injury. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 19, 177–207. doi: 10.1080/09602010802188435
8.
BottariC., DassaC., RainvilleC., & DutilE. (In press). A generalizability study of the IADL Profile. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.
9.
BottariC., & DutilE. (2000). Vers une meilleure compréhension des besoins de la personne dans les activités de la vie quotidienne (AVQ): Une analyse critique d'instruments de mesure. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Congress of the Quebec Association of Occupational Therapists, Trois-Rivières, Québec, Quebec.
10.
BottariC., DutilE., DassaC., & RainvilleC. (2006). Choosing the most appropriate environment to evaluate independence in everyday activities: Home or clinic?Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 53, 98–106. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1630.2006.00547.x
11.
BurgessP. W. (2000). Strategy application disorder: The role of the frontal lobes in human multitasking. Psychological Research, 63, 279–288.
12.
BurgessP. W., AldermanN., ForbesC., CostelloA., CoatesL. M-A., DawsonD. R., … ChannonS. (2006). The case for the development and use of “ecologically valid” measures of executive function in experimental and clinical neuropsychology. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 12, 194–209.
13.
BurgessP. W., & RobertsonI. H. (2002). Principles of the rehabilitation of frontal lobe function. In StussD. T. & KnightR. T. (Eds.), Principles of frontal lobe function (pp. 557–572). New York: Oxford University Press.
14.
ChevignardM., PillonB., Pradat-DiehlP., TailleferC., RousseauS., Le BrasC., & DuboisB. (2000). An ecological approach to planning dysfunction: Script execution. Cortex, 36, 649–669.
15.
CicchettiD. V. (1988). When diagnostic agreement is high, but reliability is low: Some paradoxes occurring in joint independent neuropsychology assessment. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 10, 605–622.
16.
CrépeauE, ScherzerB. P., BellevilleS., & DesmaraisG. (1997). A qualitative analysis of central executive disorders in a real-life work situation. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 7, 147–165. doi: 10.1080/096020197390239
17.
CrockerL., & AlginaJ. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Group/Thomas Learning.
18.
DawsonD. R., & ChipmanM. (1995). The disablement experienced by traumatically brain-injured adults living in the community. Brain Injury, 9, 339–353. doi: 10.3109/02699059509005774
19.
DonnerA., & EliasziwM. (1992). A goodness-of-fit approach to inference procedures for the kappa statistic: confidence interval construction, significance-testing and sample size estimation. Statistics in Medicine, 11, 1511–1519.
20.
DutilE., BottariC., VanierM., & GaudreaultC. (2005). ADL Profile: Description of the instrument (ScottH. & BottariC., Trans. 4th ed., Vol. 1). Montreal: Les Éditions Émersion.
21.
DutilE., ForgetA., VanierM., & GaudreaultC. (1990). Development of the ADL Profile: An evaluation for adults with severe head injury. Occupational Therapy in Health Care, 7, 7–22. doi: 10.1300/J003v07n01_03
22.
DutilE., ForgetA., VanierM., LambertJ., GaudreaultC., AugerC., & LabelleJ. (1996). Le Profil des AVQ: Un outil d'évaluation pour les personnes ayant subi un traumatisme cranio-encéphalique. Revue Québécoise d'Érgothérapie, 5, 112–120.
23.
DutilE., VanierM., & LambertJ. (1995). Changements dans les habitudes de vie suite à un traumatisme crânien. Rencontre en médecine physique et réadaptation, no.1. Expériences en ergothérapie, Huitième série, 52–56.
24.
FisherA. G. (2003). Assessment of Motor and Process skills. Volume 1: Development, standardization and administration manual (5th ed.). Fort Collins, Colorado: Three Star Press, Inc.
25.
GodboutL., GrenierM. C., BraunC. M., & GagnonS. (2005). Cognitive structure of executive deficits in patients with frontal lesions performing activities of daily living. Brain Injury, 19, 337–348. doi: 10.1080/02699050400005093
26.
GoelV., GrafmanJ., TajikJ., GanaS., & DantoD. (1997). A study of the performance of patients with frontal lobe lesions in a financial planning task. Brain, 120, 1805–1822. doi: 10.1093/brain/120.10.1805
27.
KleinS., BarlowI., & HollisV. (2008). Evaluating ADL measures from an occupational therapy perspective. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 75, 69–81.
28.
KozlowskiO., PollezB., ThevenonA., DhellemmesP., & RousseauxM. (2002). Devenir et qualité de vie à trois ans dans une cohorte de patients traumatisés crâniens graves. Annales de Réadaptation et de Médecine Physique, 45, 466–73.
29.
LandisJ. R., & KochG. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174.
30.
LezakM. D. (1989). Assessment of psychosocial dysfunctions resulting from head trauma. In LezakM. D. (Ed.), Assessment of the behavioural consequences of head trauma (pp. 113–143). New York: Alan R. Liss, Inc.
31.
LezakM. D., HowiesonD. B., & LoringD. W. (2004). Neuropsychological assessment (4th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
32.
LuriaA. R. (1966). Higher cortical functions in man (HaighB., Trans., 2nd ed.). New York: Basic Books Inc.
33.
LuriaA. R. (1973). The working brain: An introduction to neuropsychology. New York: Basic Books Inc.
34.
RabbittP. (1997). Introduction: Methodologies and models in the study of executive function. In RabbittP. (Ed.), Methodology of frontal and executive function (pp. 1–38). Hove, United Kingdom: Psychology Press.
35.
RainvilleC., PassiniR., & MarchandN. (2001). A multiple case study of wayfinding of the Alzheimer type: Decision making. Aging, Neuropsychology and Cognition, 8, 54–71.
36.
RoyallD. R., LauterbachE. C., KauferD, MalloyP., CoburnK. L., & BlackK. J. (2007). The cognitive correlates of functional status: A review from the Committee on Research of the American Neuropsychiatric Association. Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 19, 249–265.
37.
SchwartzM. F., MayerN. H., FitzpatrickdesalmeE. J., & MontgomeryM. W. (1993). Cognitive theory and the study of everyday action disorders after brain damage. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 8 (1), 59–72.
38.
SchwartzM. F., SegalM., VeramontiT., FeraroM., & BuxbaumL. J. (2002). The Naturalistic Action Test: A standardised assessment for everyday action impairment. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 12, 311–339. doi: 10.1080/09602010244000084
39.
ShalliceT., & BurgessP. W. (1991). Deficits in strategy application following frontal lobe damage in man. Brain, 114, 727–741. doi: 10.1093/brain/114.2.727
40.
TeasdaleG., & JennettB. (1974). Assessment of coma and impaired consciousness: A practical scale. Lancet, 2, 81–84.
