Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Feasibility, Reliability, and Validity of the Vietnamese Version of the Clinical Dementia Rating.
Nguyen, Vy Tuong; Quach, Trang Ho Thu; Pham, An Gia; Tran, Thang Cong.
Affiliation
  • Nguyen VT; Neurology Department, Cho Ray Hospital, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
  • Quach THT; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA.
  • Pham AG; Faculty of Pharmacy, Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology (HUTECH), Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
  • Tran TC; Neurology Department, Cho Ray Hospital, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord ; 48(5-6): 308-316, 2019.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32126553
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

In Vietnam, Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other dementias have become an increasingly important public health problem among the elderly. Achieving a diagnosis tool with high reliability and validity is essential. The Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) is a global clinical scale with established diagnostic and severity-ranking utility that has been widely employed in epidemiological studies in an international context.

OBJECTIVE:

The aims of this study were to establish the Vietnamese version of the CDR (V-CDR) and evaluate the feasibility, reliability, and validity of this version for diagnosing and classifying cognitive functions in the elderly.

METHOD:

One hundred and fifty-three elderly outpatients at a clinic of Cho Ray Hospital, Vietnam, were screened with the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) for potential cognitive impairment. All those who scored ≤26 points were included in the study and were subsequently remitted to the V-CDR and clinical assessment for diagnosis. Reliability was assessed through internal consistency (Cronbach α), intra- and interrater reliability (weighted κ). Concurrent and discriminative validity of the V-CDR were assessed.

RESULTS:

The V-CDR had an excellent internal consistency for each of the 2 raters (Cronbach α 0.90 and 0.96) and excellent agreement in both intra- and interrater reliability (weighted κ 0.84 [95% CI 0.74-0.94] and 0.82 [95% CI 0.72-0.93], respectively). The sensitivity and specificity for detecting dementia were 93.6 and 100%, respectively. The positive and negative predictive value were 100 and 96.4%, respectively. The agreement of V-CDR and clinical assessment was excellent (weighted κ 0.94 [95% CI 0.88-0.99]). V-CDR was substantially better than MMSE at distinguishing between mild cognitive impairment and normal cognitive function (AUC = 0.957, 95% CI 0.893-1.000 vs. AUC 0.594, 95% CI 0.441-0.746).

CONCLUSIONS:

The V-CDR is a feasible, reliable, and valid instrument which should be used in clinical practice for diagnosing and classifying the different dementia stages in the elderly.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Alzheimer Disease Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies Limits: Aged / Humans Country/Region as subject: Asia Language: En Journal: Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord Journal subject: GERIATRIA / NEUROLOGIA / PSIQUIATRIA Year: 2019 Type: Article Affiliation country: Vietnam

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Alzheimer Disease Type of study: Diagnostic_studies / Prognostic_studies Limits: Aged / Humans Country/Region as subject: Asia Language: En Journal: Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord Journal subject: GERIATRIA / NEUROLOGIA / PSIQUIATRIA Year: 2019 Type: Article Affiliation country: Vietnam