Interrater Reliability of the Home Assessment of Person-Environment Interaction (HoPE) – Cognitive Version

Abstract

Aims

Most older people living with a neurocognitive disorder wish to age at home, and the person-environment interaction is a key factor in helping in-home functioning. The Home Assessment of Person-Environment Interaction (HoPE) – Cognitive Version is one of the few assessment tools targeting this interaction. This study tested its interrater reliability.

Methods

Based on Classical Test Theory, two independent trained occupational therapists simultaneously administered the HoPE-Cognitive Version to 30 dyads (older person and their caregiver), at home. Kappa coefficients, percentages of agreement and standard errors were calculated.

Results

Kappa coefficients ranged from −0.053 to 1.000 (kappa_mean=0.415; percentage of agreement_range=50%-100%); the majority (80%) ranged from Fair to Almost Perfect. For each of the three sections of the HoPE-Cognitive Version, the kappa coefficients for the global scores ranged as follows: Section 1: from 0.143 to 0.310 (mean = 0.235); Section 2: from 0.086 to 0.842 (mean = 0.413); Section 3: from −0.053 to 1.000 (mean = 0.532).

Conclusion

This study documents the interrater reliability of a promising instrument for understanding the person-environment interaction of community-dwelling seniors living with neurocognitive disorders. Several low coefficients demonstrate a high percentage of agreement, according to Feinstein and Cicchetti’s paradoxes. Continuing validation of the HoPE-Cognitive Version should further support its use.

Keywords:

• Psychometric properties
• home assessment
• dementia
• older adult
• caregiver
• person-environment interaction

Acknowledgments

We sincerely thank the participants for their contribution to this study. Results of this study were presented in September 2023 at the 12th Congrès international francophone de gérontologie et gériatrie, and in October 2023 at the 52nd Annual Scientific and Educational Meeting of the Canadian Association on Gerontology.

Authors’ contribution

All authors declare that they have made a significant contribution to the work resulting from this study and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work. The authors’ respective roles were as follows: conception and design (CLD, GD, JY, ASA, JR); participant recruitment (CLD, GD, JY, ASA, JR); data collection (CLD, GD); analysis and interpretation of the data (CLD, GD, JY, JR); drafting of the manuscript (CLD, JR); manuscript critical revision (CLD, GD, JY, JR); and final approval (CLD, GD, JY, ASA, JR).

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This study is part of a larger research project funded by the Alzheimer Society of Canada under Grant #20-13. This work was supported by master’s scholarships (Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, Université de Montréal, Caisse Desjardins de Sault-au-Récollet–Montréal-Nord, Canadian Occupational Therapy Foundation, Canadian-Haitian Foundation for the Promotion of Excellence in Education, Research Center of the Institut universitaire de gériatrie de Montréal, Mitacs – Accélération, Alzheimer Society of Canada via the research grant, and Ordre des ergothérapeutes du Québec).