Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T08:28:23.066Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Development and validation of the Greek Severe Impairment Battery (SIB)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2014

Anastasia Konsta ,
Eleni Bonti ,
Eleni Parlapani ,
Loukas Athanasiadis ,
Petros Kechayas ,
Maria Karagiannidou  and
Konstantinos Fokas
Anastasia Konsta*
Affiliation:
1st Psychiatric Clinic, Papageorgiou General Hospital of Thessaloniki, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece
Eleni Bonti
Affiliation:
1st Psychiatric Clinic, Papageorgiou General Hospital of Thessaloniki, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece
Eleni Parlapani
Affiliation:
1st Psychiatric Clinic, Papageorgiou General Hospital of Thessaloniki, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece
Loukas Athanasiadis
Affiliation:
1st Psychiatric Clinic, Papageorgiou General Hospital of Thessaloniki, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece
Petros Kechayas
Affiliation:
1st Psychiatric Clinic, Papageorgiou General Hospital of Thessaloniki, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece
Maria Karagiannidou
Affiliation:
3rd Psychiatric Clinic, “AHEPA” University Hospital of Thessaloniki, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece
Konstantinos Fokas
Affiliation:
1st Psychiatric Clinic, Papageorgiou General Hospital of Thessaloniki, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: Assist. Prof. Anastasia Konsta, 1st Psychiatric Clinic, “Papageorgiou” General Hospital of Thessaloniki, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, PO 56429, Greece. Phone: +0030-2313-323904. Email: [email protected].
Get access

Abstract

Background:

Most neuropsychological batteries, especially those most often used, are unsuitable for the assessment of patients with severe dementia. The Severe Impairment Battery (SIB) was developed for the evaluation of preserved cognitive functions in these patients. The aim of this study was to formulate a Greek version of the SIB and to conduct a first assessment of its use of patients with mild, moderate, or severe Alzheimer's disease (AD), compared to the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE).

Methods:

A convenience sample of 42 dementia patients according to DSM-IV-TR criteria and 23 healthy participants was selected. Patients were assessed twice using a Greek translation of the SIB and the Greek version of MMSE. Patients were divided into three severity groups based on grouped by Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) score and the SIB and MMSE scores were compared.

Results:

The validity of the SIB was confirmed by evaluating the correlation coefficients between the SIB and Greek-MMSE, grouped by CDR, which were found to be significant. Cronbach's α for the total SIB score and each subscale score showed high significance, and the item-total correlation for each subscale was also acceptable. The test-retest correlation for the total SIB score and subscale scores were significant. The total SIB score and subscale scores were examined according to CDR.

Conclusion:

The Greek SIB is reliable and valid in differentiating patients with moderate or severe dementia, whereas MMSE loses sensitivity due to a floor and ceiling effect.

Keywords

Alzheimer's diseasedementiaagingSIB
Type
Research Article
Information
International Psychogeriatrics , Volume 26 , Issue 4 , April 2014 , pp. 591 - 596
Copyright
Copyright © International Psychogeriatric Association 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Psychiatric Association (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM-IV-TR, 4th edn, text rev. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.Google Scholar
Ballard, C. et al. (2001). Attention and fluctuating attention in patients with dementia with Lewy bodies and Alzheimer disease. Archives of Neurolology, 58, 977–982.Google Scholar
Fischer, P., Jellinger, K., Gatterer, G. and Danielczyk, W. (1991). Prospective neuropathological validation on Hachinski's Ishaemic Score in dementias. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry, 54, 580–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folstein, M., Folstein, S. and McHugh, P. R. (1975). “Mini-mental state”: a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189–198.Google Scholar
Fountoulakis, K. N., Tsolaki, M., Chantzi, H. and Kazis, A. (2000). Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE): a validation study in Greece. American Journal of Alzheimer's Disease and Other Dementias, 15, 342–345.Google Scholar
Franco-Marina, F. et al. (2010). The Mini-mental State Examination revisited: ceiling and floor effects after score adjustment for educational level in an aging Mexican population. International Psychogeriatrics, 22, 72–81.Google Scholar
Hachinski, V. et al. (1975). Cerebral blood flow in dementia. Archives of Neurology, 32, 632–637.Google Scholar
Holtzman, D. M., Morris, J. C. and Goate, A. M. (2011). Alzheimer's disease: the challenge of the second century. Science Translational Medicine, 3, 77sr1.Google Scholar
Jalbert, J. J., Daiello, L. A. and Lapane, K. L. (2008). Dementia of the Alzheimer type. Epidemiology Review, 30, 15–34.Google Scholar
Marin, D. B. et al. (2001). Reliability and validity of a chronic care facility adaptation of the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 16, 745–750.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McKhann, G. et al. (1984). Clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease: report of the NINCDS-ADRDA Work Group under the auspices of Department of Health and Human Services Task Force on Alzheimer's disease. Neurology, 34, 939–944.Google Scholar
Morris, J. C. (1993). The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR): current version and scoring rules. Neurology, 43, 2412–2414.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Panisset, M., Roudier, M., Saxton, J. and Boller, F. (1992). A battery of neuropsychological tests for severe dementia. An evaluation study. Presse Medicale, 21, 1271–1274.Google Scholar
Pélissier, C., Roudier, M. and Boller, F. (2002). Factorial validation of the severe impairment battery for patients with Alzheimer's disease. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 13, 95–100.Google Scholar
Pippi, M. et al. (1999). Neuropsychological assessment of the severely impaired elderly patient: validation of the Italian short version of the Severe Impairment Battery (SIB). Gruppo di Studio sull'Invecchiamento Cerebrale della Societa Italiana di Gerontologia e Geriatria. Aging (Milano), 11, 221–226.Google Scholar
Riordan, K. C. et al. (2011). Effectiveness of adding memantine to an Alzheimer dementia treatment regimen which already includes stable donepezil therapy: a critically appraised topic. Neurologist, 17, 121–123.Google Scholar
Schmitt, F. A. et al. (1997). The severe impairment battery: concurrent validity and the assessment of longitudinal change in Alzheimer's disease. The Alzheimer's disease cooperative study. Alzheimer Disease and Associated Disorders, 11, S51–56.Google Scholar
Swainson, R. et al. (2001). Early detection and differential diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease and depression with neuropsychological tasks. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 12, 265–280.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tariot, P. N. et al. (2004). Memantine treatment in patients with moderate to severe Alzheimer disease already receiving donepezil: a randomized controlled trial. Journal of American Medical Association, 291, 317–324.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilkinson, D. and Andersen, H. F. (2007). Analysis of the effect of memantine in reducing the worsening of clinical symptoms in patients with moderate to severe Alzheimer's disease. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 24, 138–145.Google Scholar