Measures of Awareness in Alzheimer’s Disease and Clinical Differences Between Groups with Preserved, Impaired, and Absent Awareness

Author:

Lacerda Isabel Barbeito1,Baptista Maria Alice Tourinho1,Belfort Tatiana1,Mograbi Daniel23,Dourado Marcia Cristina Nascimento1

Affiliation:

1. Center for Alzheimer’s Disease, Institute of Psychiatry, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

2. Department of Psychology, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, Gávea, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

3. Department of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, UK

Abstract

Background: Awareness is a heterogeneous construct that requires accurate assessment. There is no consensus on the best methodology for capturing the phenomenon, thus leading to inconsistent results in this area. Objective: We aim to evaluate the reliability of clinicians’ ratings and a discrepancy assessment method, examining groups of people with Alzheimer’s disease (PwAD) according to their degree of awareness and demographic and clinical aspects. Methods: We cross-sectionally assessed 134 PwAD and their caregivers. Individuals’ level of awareness was assessed with two methods: clinicians’ ratings identified three groups (preserved awareness, impaired awareness, and absent awareness), while discrepancy assessment identified four groups (preserved awareness, mildly impaired awareness, moderately impaired awareness, and absent awareness). Results: Clinicians’ ratings showed significant differences between PwAD with preserved, impaired, and absent awareness groups in cognition, functionality, and neuropsychiatric symptoms. There was a significant difference in caregivers’ anxiety between the impaired and absent awareness groups. Discrepancy assessment showed no clinical differences between the preserved and mildly impaired awareness groups or between the absent and moderately impaired awareness groups. A significant difference in functionality was observed between the other groups. Conclusions: Clinical aspects of each measure tended to differ between the chosen methods. Impairments in awareness fluctuate despite disease progression. Cognition and severity of disease cannot explain deficits in awareness.

Publisher

IOS Press

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3