![Sample our Behavioral Sciences journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110801/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Behavioral-Sciences.jpg"})
Abstract
Objectives: The Rating Anxiety in Dementia (RAID; Shankar, K.K., Walker, M., Frost, D., & Orrell, M.W. (1999). The development of a valid and reliable scale for rating anxiety in dementia (RAID). Aging and Mental Health, 3, 39–49.) is a clinical rating scale developed to evaluate anxiety in persons with dementia. This report explores the psychometric properties and clinical utility of a new structured interview format of the RAID (RAID-SI), developed to standardize administration and scoring based on information obtained from the patient, an identified collateral, and rater observation.
Method: The RAID-SI was administered by trained master's level raters. Participants were 32 persons with dementia who qualified for an anxiety treatment outcome study. Self-report anxiety, depression, and quality of life measures were administered to both the person with dementia and a collateral.
Results: The RAID-SI exhibited adequate internal consistency reliability and inter-rater reliability. There was also some evidence of construct validity as indicated by significant correlations with other measures of patient-reported and collateral-reported anxiety, and non-significant correlations with collateral reports of patient depression and quality of life. Further, RAID-SI scores were significantly higher in persons with an anxiety diagnosis compared to those without an anxiety diagnosis.
Conclusion: There is evidence that the RAID-SI exhibits good reliability and validity in older adults with dementia. The advantage of the structured interview format is increased standardization in administration and scoring, which may be particularly important when RAID raters are not experienced clinicians.
Acknowledgments
This study was supported in part by a grant from the National Institute of Mental Health (R34-MH078925) to Melinda A. Stanley and by the Houston VA HSR&D Center of Excellence (Houston Center for Quality of Care & Utilization Studies [HFP90-020]). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIMH, the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Veterans Affairs, Baylor College or Medicine or the authors’ other affiliated institutions. The NIMH had no role in the design and conduct of the study; the collection, management, analysis and interpretation of the data; or the preparation, review or approval of the manuscript.
