Development, reliability, validity, and acceptability of the remote administration of the Edinburgh Cognitive and Behavioural ALS Screen (ECAS)

Debbie Gray,Rosemary Lesley,Emily J Mayberry,Luke Williams,Caroline McHutchison,Judith Newton,Suvankar Pal,Siddharthan Chandran,Sarah E MacPherson,Sharon Abrahams,MND Consortium

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21678421.2023.2278512

Abstract:Background: ALS clinical care and research has changed dramatically since the COVID-19 pandemic, accelerating the need for cognitive assessments to be adapted for remote use. Objectives: To develop the remote administration method of the Edinburgh Cognitive and Behavioural ALS Screen (ECAS), and determine its reliability and validity. Methods: The validation process consisted of: (1) Two versions of the ECAS (A and B) were administered, one in-person and one remotely via video call in a randomized order to 27 people without ALS; (2) The ECAS was administered remotely to 24 pwALS, with a second rater independently scoring performance; and (3) Acceptability was assessed by gathering feedback from 17 pwALS and 19 clinicians and researchers about their experience of using the ECAS remotely. Results: In the group without ALS, the remote and in-person ECAS total scores were found to be equivalent, and a Bland-Altman plot showed good agreement between the two administration methods. In pwALS, there was excellent agreement between two raters (ICC = 0.99). Positive feedback was gained from pwALS, researchers and clinicians with regards to ease of process, convenience, time, and the environment. Conclusions: These findings provide evidence of the reliability and validity of the remote administration of the ECAS for pwALS, with clinicians, researchers and pwALS viewing it as a good alternative to face-to-face administration.