Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T08:08:55.576Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Validation study of the Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly (CANE) in Portugal

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2008

Lia Fernandes ,
Manuel Gonçalves-Pereira ,
António Leuschner ,
Sónia Martins ,
Margarida Sobral ,
Luís F. Azevedo ,
Cláudia Dias ,
Raimundo Mateos  and
Martin Orrell
Lia Fernandes*
Affiliation:
Psychiatry Service of Hospital S. João / UNIFAI/ICBAS, University of Oporto, Portugal
Manuel Gonçalves-Pereira
Affiliation:
Department of Mental Health, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, FCM–UNL, Portugal
António Leuschner
Affiliation:
Hospital Magalhães Lemos / Institute of Biomedical Sciences Abel Salazar, Portugal
Sónia Martins
Affiliation:
Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Coimbra, Portugal
Margarida Sobral
Affiliation:
Hospital Magalhães Lemos / Institute of Biomedical Sciences Abel Salazar, Portugal
Luís F. Azevedo
Affiliation:
Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oporto, Portugal
Cláudia Dias
Affiliation:
Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oporto, Portugal
Raimundo Mateos
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry (USC) and CHUS University Hospital, Santiago Compostela, Spain
Martin Orrell
Affiliation:
Department of Mental Health Sciences, University College London, U.K.
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: Lia Fernandes, Rua de Ceuta, 53-1°, 4050-191 Porto, Portugal. Phone: +351 228 319890. Email: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background: The Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly (CANE) is widely used for multidimensional evaluation of older people with mental health problems. The aim of this study was to evaluate reliability and validity of a Portuguese version of CANE.

Method: A cross-sectional multicenter study was designed using a convenience sample of elderly mental health services' users. CANE was compared with EASYCare, GHQ12, MMSE, Barthel Index and GDS15 to assess criterion and construct validity. Inter-rater and test-retest reliability were also assessed.

Results: 79 patients (76% female), with mean age of 74 (± 6.6) years were included. Most patients lived at home with a family caregiver, generally female. Only 32% had no carer. Dementia was the commonest psychiatric diagnosis (61%) and somatic comorbidity was very prevalent (85%). Kappa values (κ) for inter-rater item reliability ranged from 0.72 to 1.00 (mean values: 0.96 patient, 0.93 carer, 0.90 staff). The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for total scores ranged from 0.95 to 0.98.

For test-retest item reliability, the mean κ value was: 0.80 patient, 0.77 carer, 0.81 staff. ICC for total scores ranged from 0.82 to 0.92. Given the absence of a gold standard, criterion validity was assessed by comparing CANE with EASYCare (rs0.460; p ≤ 0.01), GDS (rs0.615; p ≤ 0.01), GHQ (rs0.581; p ≤ 0.01) and Barthel Index (rs-0.435; p ≤ 0.01). Overall, inter-item and item-total correlations for CANE and item comparison with other measures indicated reasonable construct validity.

Conclusion: The psychometric proprieties of CANE seem to be consistently good, in accordance with other studies. Robust results on ecological, face, content, criterion and construct validity, as well as good reliability, were achieved. This version is a promising tool for research and practical use in Portuguese old age settings.

Keywords

needs assessmentelderlyolder peopleagedCANEvalidation studies
Type
Research Article
Information
International Psychogeriatrics , Volume 21 , Issue 1 , February 2009 , pp. 94 - 102
Copyright
Copyright © International Psychogeriatric Association 2008

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

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edn. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
CNRSSM (Comissão Nacional para a Reestruturação dos Serviços de Saúde Mental) (2007). Relatório – Proposta de Plano de Acção para a Reestruturação e Desenvolvimento dos Serviços de Saúde Mental em Portugal, 2007–2016. Portugal: Ministério da Saúde. 2007 April 12. Available at http://www.portugal.gov.pt/NR/rdonlyres/D555890E-A1A7-4703-BF98-4D1EDFB35DB1/0/Rel_Reestruturacao_Saude_Mental1.pdfGoogle Scholar
Dech, H. and Machleidt, W. (2004). Relevance and applicability of the CANE in the German Health Care System. In Orrell, M. and Hancock, G. (eds.), CANE: Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly (pp.21–28). London: Gaskell.Google Scholar
Fernandes, L. et al. (2007). CANE en contexto clínico: estudio piloto. Anales de Psiquiatria, 23, 120–121.Google Scholar
Fleiss, J. (1981). The measurement of inter-rater agreement. In Fleiss, J. L., Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Folstein, M., Folstein, S. and McHugh, P. (1975). “Mini-mental state”: a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189–198.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldberg, D. (1978). Manual of the General Health Questionnaire. Slough: National Foundation of Educational Research.Google Scholar
Gonçalves-Pereira, M. et al. (2007). Versão portuguesa of Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly: desenvolvimento e dados preliminares. Revista Portuguesa de Saúde Pública, 25, 7–18.Google Scholar
Graffar, M. (1956). Une méthode de classification sociale – échantillons de population. Courrier, 6, 445–459.Google Scholar
Mahoney, F. and Barthel, D. (1965). Functional evaluation: the Barthel index. Maryland State Medical Journal, 14, 61–65.Google ScholarPubMed
Mateos, R., Ybarzábal, M., Garcia, M., Amboage, M. and Fraguela, I. (2004). The Spanish CANE: validation study and utility in epidemiological surveys. In Orrell, M. and Hancock, G. (eds.), CANE: Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly (pp.21–28). London: Gaskell.Google Scholar
Murphy, E. (1992). A more ambitious vision for residential long-term care. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 7, 851–852.Google Scholar
Orrell, M. and Hancock, G. (2004). CANE: Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly. London: Gaskell.Google Scholar
Phelan, M., Slade, M. and Thornicroft, G. (1995). The Camberwell Assessment of Needs: the validity and reliability of an instrument to assess the needs of people with severe mental illness. British Journal of Psychiatry, 167, 589–595.Google Scholar
Philp, I., Armstrong, G., Coyle, G., Chadwick, I. and Machado, A. (1999). A better way to measure disability in older people. Age and Ageing, 27, 519–522.Google Scholar
Pill, J. (1971). The Delphi method: substance, context, a critique and an annotated bibliography. Socio-Economic Planning Science, 5, 57–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reynolds, T. et al. (2000). Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly: development, validity and reliability. British Journal of Psychiatry, 176, 444–452.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rowe, G., Wright, B. and Bolger, F. (1991). Delphi: a re-evaluation of research and theory. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 39, 235–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Streiner, D. and Norman, R. (1995). Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ybarzábal, M., Mateos, R., García, M., Amboage, M. and Fraguela, I. (2002). Validación de la versíon española del CANE. Escala de Evaluación de Necessidades para Ancianos de Camberwell. Revista de Psicogeriatria, 2, 38–44.Google Scholar
Yesavage, J., Brunk, T., Rose, T., Huang, V., Adey, M. and Leirer, V. (1983). Development and validation of a geriatric depression screening scale: a preliminary report. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 17, 37–49.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Fernandes supplementary material

Table 1.doc

Download Fernandes supplementary material(File)
File 90.6 KB
Supplementary material: File

Fernandes supplementary material

Table 2.doc

Download Fernandes supplementary material(File)
File 35.3 KB