Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Caregiver perception of apathy in persons with mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimer's disease: a longitudinal study


Pfeifer, Livia; Horn, Andrea B; Maercker, Andreas; Forstmeier, Simon (2017). Caregiver perception of apathy in persons with mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimer's disease: a longitudinal study. Aging & Mental Health, 21(5):494-500.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Discrepancy between self- and caregiver apathy ratings was examined longitudinally for persons with mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimer's disease. Particular focus was on the distinction between the positive and negative caregiver bias and its predictive value for a clinical diagnosis of apathy.
METHOD: Apathy rating discrepancy was based on the apathy evaluation scale. Dyads were categorized depending on whether the caregiver reported fewer deficits (positive caregiver bias) or more deficits (negative caregiver bias) than the cognitively impaired person did.
RESULTS: Caregiver ratings and rating discrepancy showed a significant increase from baseline to follow-up. By contrast, self- and clinician ratings showed no change across the two time points. Ratings with a negative caregiver bias remained stable, while those with a positive caregiver bias showed a significant increase in the caregiver ratings but also a significant decrease in the self-ratings. A negative caregiver bias at baseline was significantly related to greater likelihood of having clinical apathy at follow-up, adjusted for an array of control variables.
CONCLUSION: Positive and negative caregiver bias should be distinguished, as they seem to reflect distinct dyadic processes and are relevant for clinical outcome. Furthermore, negative rating discrepancies can be considered a risk factor for developing apathy.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Discrepancy between self- and caregiver apathy ratings was examined longitudinally for persons with mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimer's disease. Particular focus was on the distinction between the positive and negative caregiver bias and its predictive value for a clinical diagnosis of apathy.
METHOD: Apathy rating discrepancy was based on the apathy evaluation scale. Dyads were categorized depending on whether the caregiver reported fewer deficits (positive caregiver bias) or more deficits (negative caregiver bias) than the cognitively impaired person did.
RESULTS: Caregiver ratings and rating discrepancy showed a significant increase from baseline to follow-up. By contrast, self- and clinician ratings showed no change across the two time points. Ratings with a negative caregiver bias remained stable, while those with a positive caregiver bias showed a significant increase in the caregiver ratings but also a significant decrease in the self-ratings. A negative caregiver bias at baseline was significantly related to greater likelihood of having clinical apathy at follow-up, adjusted for an array of control variables.
CONCLUSION: Positive and negative caregiver bias should be distinguished, as they seem to reflect distinct dyadic processes and are relevant for clinical outcome. Furthermore, negative rating discrepancies can be considered a risk factor for developing apathy.

Statistics

Altmetrics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:06 Faculty of Arts > Institute of Psychology
Dewey Decimal Classification:150 Psychology
Uncontrolled Keywords:DoktoratPsych Erstautor
Language:English
Date:2017
Deposited On:29 Jan 2016 10:07
Last Modified:21 Apr 2017 01:00
Publisher:Taylor & Francis
ISSN:1360-7863
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2015.1118678
PubMed ID:26666575

Download

Full text not available from this repository.
View at publisher

Article Networks

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations