4.2 Article

Ability to manage everyday technology: a comparison of persons with dementia or mild cognitive impairment and older adults without cognitive impairment

期刊

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.3109/17483107.2010.496098

关键词

Alzheimer's disease; MCI; IADL

资金

  1. Health Care Sciences Postgraduate School
  2. Botkyrka community
  3. Swedish Brainpower
  4. medical training and clinical research (ALF) between the Stockholm County Council
  5. Karolinska Institutet

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose. The ability to manage technology is important for performance and participation in everyday activities. This study compares the management of technology in everyday activities among people with mild-stage dementia or mild cognitive impairment (MCI) with older adults without known cognitive impairment (OA). Method. Persons with mild-stage dementia (n = 38), MCI (n = 33) and OA (n = 45) were observed and interviewed when managing their everyday technology at home by using the Management of Everyday Technology Assessment (META). A computer application of a Rasch measurement model was used to generate measures of participants' ability to manage technology. These measures were compared groupwise with ANCOVA. Results. The management of everyday technology was significantly more challenging for the samples with mild-stage Alzheimer's disease (AD) or MCI compared to the OA sample (AD - OA, p < 0.001; d = 1.87, MCI - OA, p < 0.001; d = 0.66). The sample with MCI demonstrated a significantly higher ability to manage technology than the sample with mild-stage AD (AD - MCI, p < 0.001; d = 1.23). However, there were overlaps between the groups and decreased ability appeared in all groups. Conclusions. Persons with cognitive impairment are likely to have decreased ability to manage everyday technology. Since their decreased ability can have disabling consequences, ability to manage technology is important to consider when assessing ability to perform everyday activities.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据