The Italian validation of the Communicative Effectiveness Index Questionnaire: a multicentric study.

INTRODUCTION: Common assessment tools for aphasia evaluate single language impairments but not their functional impact on patient's communication skills in daily life. The lack of tools focused on ecological aspects might affect the choice of rehabilitative trainings. The Communicative Effectiveness Index (CETI) represents an attempt to assess the communicative abilities in "ecologic" context. This study aimed to explore psychometrics properties of the Italian translation and adaptation of CETI (I-CETI). METHODS: Sixty-eight patients with aphasia due to left hemispheric stroke admitted to post-acute rehabilitation units and their relatives were included in the study. Data were collected in three different sessions. At study entry, patients were assessed for language, depression, and functional abilities, while their caregivers and speech therapists independently completed the I-CETI to assess inter-rater agreement (baseline). One week later, caregivers and speech therapists completed again I-CETI, to assess test-retest reliability (T1). Last, at discharge, patients completed again the evaluation protocol, and caregivers and speech therapists completed I-CETI (T2). RESULTS: I-CETI showed high internal validity, excellent reliability, and good correlation between scores obtained by speech therapists and caregivers. Moreover, scores of I-CETI had quite good correlations with a traditional tool to assess language, and with measures of functional independence both at study entry and at discharge. DISCUSSION: I-CETI showed good psychometric proprieties. These results allowed considering I-CETI as a reliable tool to assess effects of speech treatments on the communicative abilities in patients with aphasia. Furthermore, I-CETI might help clinicians to develop treatments more tailored on the "ecologic" difficulties of patients.

The Italian McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire-Revised (MQoL-R): Psychometrics in Neurological and Neoplastic Populations.

BACKGROUND: The McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire-Revised (MQoL-R) is the gold standard for assessing QoL in end-of-life, chronic patients; however, an Italian standardization is lacking. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed at assessing the psychometric properties of the Italian MQoL-R in patients with chronic neurological/oncological conditions. METHODS: 177 inpatients with life-threatening, chronic neurological/oncological conditions were consecutively recruited in 8 clinics in Northern/Southern Italy were administered the MQoL-R and the Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS). Factorial structure (Confirmatory Factor Analysis, CFA), reliability (Cronbach's α) and construct validity against the KPS (Pearson's coefficients) were examined. RESULTS: The four-factor model (Physical, Psychological, Existential and Social subscales) was met (comparative fit index = .93; root mean square error of approximation = .07), with all items significantly loading on respective subscales. Internal consistency was good for both the whole scale (Cronbach's α = .83) and subscales (range = .6-.85). The KPS was unrelated to MQoL-R measures, except for the Physical subscale (r = .24). CONCLUSIONS: The Italian MQoL-R is a valid and reliable tool to assess QoL in end-of-life, both neoplastic and neurological, chronic inpatients undergoing palliative care, whose adoption is thus encouraged in both clinical practice and research addressed to such populations.