Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-544b6db54f-dkqnh Total loading time: 0.186 Render date: 2021-10-22T08:18:37.116Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Validation study of the Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly (CANE) in Portugal

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2008

Lia Fernandes*
Affiliation:
Psychiatry Service of Hospital S. João / UNIFAI/ICBAS, University of Oporto, Portugal
Manuel Gonçalves-Pereira
Affiliation:
Department of Mental Health, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, FCM–UNL, Portugal
António Leuschner
Affiliation:
Hospital Magalhães Lemos / Institute of Biomedical Sciences Abel Salazar, Portugal
Sónia Martins
Affiliation:
Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Coimbra, Portugal
Margarida Sobral
Affiliation:
Hospital Magalhães Lemos / Institute of Biomedical Sciences Abel Salazar, Portugal
Luís F. Azevedo
Affiliation:
Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oporto, Portugal
Cláudia Dias
Affiliation:
Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oporto, Portugal
Raimundo Mateos
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry (USC) and CHUS University Hospital, Santiago Compostela, Spain
Martin Orrell
Affiliation:
Department of Mental Health Sciences, University College London, U.K.
*
Correspondence should be addressed to: Lia Fernandes, Rua de Ceuta, 53-1°, 4050-191 Porto, Portugal. Phone: +351 228 319890. Email: lia.fernandes@mail.telepac.pt.

Abstract

Background: The Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly (CANE) is widely used for multidimensional evaluation of older people with mental health problems. The aim of this study was to evaluate reliability and validity of a Portuguese version of CANE.

Method: A cross-sectional multicenter study was designed using a convenience sample of elderly mental health services' users. CANE was compared with EASYCare, GHQ12, MMSE, Barthel Index and GDS15 to assess criterion and construct validity. Inter-rater and test-retest reliability were also assessed.

Results: 79 patients (76% female), with mean age of 74 (± 6.6) years were included. Most patients lived at home with a family caregiver, generally female. Only 32% had no carer. Dementia was the commonest psychiatric diagnosis (61%) and somatic comorbidity was very prevalent (85%). Kappa values (κ) for inter-rater item reliability ranged from 0.72 to 1.00 (mean values: 0.96 patient, 0.93 carer, 0.90 staff). The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for total scores ranged from 0.95 to 0.98.

For test-retest item reliability, the mean κ value was: 0.80 patient, 0.77 carer, 0.81 staff. ICC for total scores ranged from 0.82 to 0.92. Given the absence of a gold standard, criterion validity was assessed by comparing CANE with EASYCare (rs0.460; p ≤ 0.01), GDS (rs0.615; p ≤ 0.01), GHQ (rs0.581; p ≤ 0.01) and Barthel Index (rs-0.435; p ≤ 0.01). Overall, inter-item and item-total correlations for CANE and item comparison with other measures indicated reasonable construct validity.

Conclusion: The psychometric proprieties of CANE seem to be consistently good, in accordance with other studies. Robust results on ecological, face, content, criterion and construct validity, as well as good reliability, were achieved. This version is a promising tool for research and practical use in Portuguese old age settings.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Psychogeriatric Association 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edn. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
CNRSSM (Comissão Nacional para a Reestruturação dos Serviços de Saúde Mental) (2007). Relatório – Proposta de Plano de Acção para a Reestruturação e Desenvolvimento dos Serviços de Saúde Mental em Portugal, 2007–2016. Portugal: Ministério da Saúde. 2007 April 12. Available at http://www.portugal.gov.pt/NR/rdonlyres/D555890E-A1A7-4703-BF98-4D1EDFB35DB1/0/Rel_Reestruturacao_Saude_Mental1.pdfGoogle Scholar
Dech, H. and Machleidt, W. (2004). Relevance and applicability of the CANE in the German Health Care System. In Orrell, M. and Hancock, G. (eds.), CANE: Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly (pp.2128). London: Gaskell.Google Scholar
Fernandes, L. et al. (2007). CANE en contexto clínico: estudio piloto. Anales de Psiquiatria, 23, 120121.Google Scholar
Fleiss, J. (1981). The measurement of inter-rater agreement. In Fleiss, J. L., Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Folstein, M., Folstein, S. and McHugh, P. (1975). “Mini-mental state”: a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189198.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goldberg, D. (1978). Manual of the General Health Questionnaire. Slough: National Foundation of Educational Research.Google Scholar
Gonçalves-Pereira, M. et al. (2007). Versão portuguesa of Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly: desenvolvimento e dados preliminares. Revista Portuguesa de Saúde Pública, 25, 718.Google Scholar
Graffar, M. (1956). Une méthode de classification sociale – échantillons de population. Courrier, 6, 445459.Google Scholar
Mahoney, F. and Barthel, D. (1965). Functional evaluation: the Barthel index. Maryland State Medical Journal, 14, 6165.Google ScholarPubMed
Mateos, R., Ybarzábal, M., Garcia, M., Amboage, M. and Fraguela, I. (2004). The Spanish CANE: validation study and utility in epidemiological surveys. In Orrell, M. and Hancock, G. (eds.), CANE: Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly (pp.2128). London: Gaskell.Google Scholar
Murphy, E. (1992). A more ambitious vision for residential long-term care. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 7, 851852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orrell, M. and Hancock, G. (2004). CANE: Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly. London: Gaskell.Google Scholar
Phelan, M., Slade, M. and Thornicroft, G. (1995). The Camberwell Assessment of Needs: the validity and reliability of an instrument to assess the needs of people with severe mental illness. British Journal of Psychiatry, 167, 589595.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Philp, I., Armstrong, G., Coyle, G., Chadwick, I. and Machado, A. (1999). A better way to measure disability in older people. Age and Ageing, 27, 519522.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pill, J. (1971). The Delphi method: substance, context, a critique and an annotated bibliography. Socio-Economic Planning Science, 5, 5771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reynolds, T. et al. (2000). Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly: development, validity and reliability. British Journal of Psychiatry, 176, 444452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowe, G., Wright, B. and Bolger, F. (1991). Delphi: a re-evaluation of research and theory. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 39, 235251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Streiner, D. and Norman, R. (1995). Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ybarzábal, M., Mateos, R., García, M., Amboage, M. and Fraguela, I. (2002). Validación de la versíon española del CANE. Escala de Evaluación de Necessidades para Ancianos de Camberwell. Revista de Psicogeriatria, 2, 3844.Google Scholar
Yesavage, J., Brunk, T., Rose, T., Huang, V., Adey, M. and Leirer, V. (1983). Development and validation of a geriatric depression screening scale: a preliminary report. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 17, 3749.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Fernandes supplementary material

Table 1.doc

Download Fernandes supplementary material(File)
File 91 KB
Supplementary material: File

Fernandes supplementary material

Table 2.doc

Download Fernandes supplementary material(File)
File 35 KB
30
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Validation study of the Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly (CANE) in Portugal
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Validation study of the Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly (CANE) in Portugal
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Validation study of the Camberwell Assessment of Need for the Elderly (CANE) in Portugal
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *