Introduction and preliminary psychometric evaluation of the assessment of functional capacity interview for older adults
Nicole Sergeyev Nadia Paré Aneela Rahman Anjali Krishnan David E. Warren Trevor Wolterstoff Anna Wilhelm Erica Aflagah Laura Rabin a Department of Psychology,Brooklyn College,City University of New York,New York,NY,USAb Gaylord Specialty Hospital,Wallingford,CT,USAc Department of Psychology,Queens College,City University of New York,New York,NY,USAd Department of Psychology,The Graduate Center,City University of New York,New York,NY,USAe Department of Neurological Sciences,University of Nebraska Medical Center,Omaha,NE,USAf Department of Psychiatry,University of South Dakota Sanford School of Medicine,Sioux Falls,SD,USAg Department of Geriatric Medicine,Neuropsychology,Nebraska Methodist Health System,Omaha,NE,USA
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2024.2419932
2024-11-07
Applied Neuropsychology Adult
Abstract:Measures of complex functional decision-making capacity can greatly aid in assessing mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and facilitating early intervention in dementia care. We examined the ability of the Assessment of Functional Capacity Interview (AFCI) to detect functional differences among older adults who were cognitively unimpaired (CU), or who presented with subjective cognitive decline (SCD) or MCI. A sample of 97 older adults (CU; n = 30, Mage = 74.64 ± 7.42 years; SCD; n = 34, Mage = 72.56 ± 6.43 years; MCI; n = 33, Mage = 78.28 ± 7.55 years) underwent neuropsychological testing and responded to the Financial Capacity Instrument (FCI-SF). Informants completed the Assessment of Functional Capacity (AFCI), an instrument of functional decision-making capacity, and responded to the Social Vulnerability Scale (SVS15) and Amsterdam Instrumental Activity of Daily Living (A-IADL-Q-SV), a measure of functional status, for comparison. According to informant-reported responses, the CU group had significantly lower AFCI total (and domain) scores, H (2) = 27.59, p <.001, relative to MCI. Additionally, the CU group had significantly lower AFCI scores in the Home and Personal Safety domain relative to the SCD group, H (2) = 14.06, p <.05. In the overall sample, AFCI total scores were associated with FCI-SF, SVS15, and A-IADL-Q-SV scores and cognitive measures. Our results demonstrate that the AFCI is sensitive to impairment in safety, social, financial, and medical functioning in MCI and is associated with measures of cognitive functioning and social vulnerability in older adults. Incorporating this instrument as a supplement to cognitive screening instruments may aid in the prevention of hazardous decision-making in older adults.
psychology,clinical neurology