The validity of the minimum data set in measuring the cognitive impairmentof persons admitted to nursing homes

Citation
Al. Gruber-baldini et al., The validity of the minimum data set in measuring the cognitive impairmentof persons admitted to nursing homes, J AM GER SO, 48(12), 2000, pp. 1601-1606
Citations number
24
Categorie Soggetti
Public Health & Health Care Science","General & Internal Medicine
Journal title
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY
ISSN journal
00028614 → ACNP
Volume
48
Issue
12
Year of publication
2000
Pages
1601 - 1606
Database
ISI
SICI code
0002-8614(200012)48:12<1601:TVOTMD>2.0.ZU;2-D
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study examined the construct validity of two cognitive sca les from the federally mandated Minimum Data Set (MDS) of the nursing home Resident Assessment Instrument. DESIGN: A cross-sectional comparisons of the MDS measures, with scales prov ided by the resident, a proxy person, and nursing staff. SETTING: Subjects residing in 59 nursing homes (NHs) in Maryland from 1992 to 1995. PARTICIPANTS: Subjects were 1939 new admissions to NHs, aged 65 and older, with complete MDS information at admission. MEASUREMENTS: Two MDS scales, the Cognitive Performance Scale (CPS) and the MDS Cognition Scale (MDS-COGS), were compared with the Milli-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the staff rating on the Psychogeriatric Dependency R ating Scale (PGDRS) Orientation scale, as well as measures of functioning a nd functional decline. RESULTS: The CPS and the MDS-COGS were highly correlated (r = 0.92). Both c orrelated moderately well with the MMSE (r = -0.65 and -0.68) and with staf f's rating on the PGDRS Orientation scale (r = 0.63 and r = 0.66). Correlat ions with the MMSE (r < 0.70) are lower than previously reported (r = 0.80) . The proportion of cognitively impaired residents in this NH admission coh ort was higher using the MDS-COGS than the CPS (65% vs 57%), but both MDS s cales produced Lower proportions than the MMSE (70%) and higher proportions than the PGDRS (47%). The internal consistency of the CPS was better witho ut the comatose item (alpha = 0.80 vs 0.70). The MDS-COGS had higher intern al consistency (alpha = 0.85) and was simpler to compute. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to examine the validity of the MDS in a large sample of residents and NHs in situations where the MDS was not com pleted by research trained staff. Compared with other instruments, the MDS- COGS and the CPS had moderate and similar validity for assessing cognitive impairment. Differences in the scales could provide different estimates of impairment among persons admitted to nursing homes.