HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kiryankova, E. Articles by Lieto, J. M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kiryankova, E. Articles by Lieto, J. M.

Background and Hypothesis: At this time, there are no objective measures to help determine which level of care in the continuing care retirement communities (CCRCs) is most appropriate for an elderly individual. The goal of this project was to evaluate the usefulness of the Dementia Rating Scale-2: Alternate Form (DRS-2: AF)¹ in differentiating appropriate placements within CCRCs. How well do DRS-2: AF scores differentiate between residents in independent living (IL) and assisted living (AS) settings? We hypothesized that individuals living independently would score significantly better than those placed in an assisted living environment.

Materials and Methods: Participants included 64 individuals residing at the Cadbury CCRC, Cherry Hill, NJ (27 in IL and 37 in AL). We administered the DRS-2: AF to all 64 participants. All DRS-2: AF protocols were scored, and results were entered into an SPSS database.

Living placement (IL or AL) was based on an interdisciplinary team assessment, including a geriatric physician, clinical social worker, physical therapist, and nurse.

We ran descriptive statistics, including mean and standard deviations for total score and subscales, and Student's t-tests to examine differences between means for IL and AL participants.

Results: In terms of the descriptive statistics for each group (IL and AL) for total score and subscale scores, the IL group received higher scores on the DRS-2: AF total score (m=130.52, SD=8.10) in comparison to the AL group (m=114.14, SD=20.92). A similar pattern was seen across the subscale scores as well.

The results of the t-tests revealed significant differences across groups for total score (P<.001), with IL participants receiving significantly higher scores. Likewise IL participants received significantly higher scores on the following subscale scores as well: Initiation and Perseveration (P<.001), Construction (P=.03), and Memory (P<.001).

Conclusion:Our findings suggest the DRS-2: AF total score as well as the three subscales may be useful in differentiating residents residing in IL settings from residents in AL settings. Individuals with lower scores should be considered for an AL placement, as opposed to IL placement. The DRS-2: AF may be a useful tool in making placement decisions for potential residents within CCRCs.

Footnotes
Sponsors: The project was sponsored by a Pfizer grant and a Summer Research Student Fellowship program at UMDNJ-SOM.

University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey–School of Osteopathic Medicine (UMDNJ-SOM), Center for Aging, Stratford, NJ 08084

References
1. Schmidt K. Dementia Rating Scale-2: Alternate Form Supplemental Manual. Lutz, Fla: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc; 2004.

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Kiryankova, E. Articles by Lieto, J. M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Kiryankova, E. Articles by Lieto, J. M.