Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The Episodic Disability Questionnaire (EDQ) was developed to measure the presence, severity and episodic nature of disability experienced among persons with chronic conditions. Our aim was to assess the sensibility, utility and implementation considerations of the EDQ among older adults with complex health needs. DESIGN: Cross-sectional measurement study involving quantitative and qualitative methods of data collection. PARTICIPANTS: We recruited community-dwelling older adults (65 years of age or older) living with complex health needs receiving care from a primary healthcare team in Toronto, Canada. METHODS: We administered the EDQ, sensibility questionnaire (assessing face and content validity, and ease of usage, with each item scored from 0 to 7 with greater scores indicating greater sensibility) and demographic questionnaire, followed by a semi-structured interview in the home or clinical setting. Using an interview guide, we asked participants about their perspectives on utility, format and implementation of the EDQ in clinical practice. We considered the EDQ sensible if the median score on the sensibility questionnaire was ≥5/7 for ≥80% of items and if none of the items had a median score of ≤3/7. We conducted a team-based directed content analysis of the interview transcripts. RESULTS: The median age of the 11 participants in this study was 83 years of age. All participants reported living with two or more chronic health conditions, with osteoarthritis (n=5) and diabetes (n=4) most frequently reported. The EDQ met the criterion for sensibility as measured by the sensibility questionnaire. Interview data from participants (n=10) indicated that the EDQ represents the health-related challenges among this sample of older adults with complex health needs, captures the episodic nature of disability and was easy to use. Utility of the EDQ included providing clinicians with a holistic understanding of health challenges older adults face, aiding in intervention planning and measuring changes in disability over time. Six of the participants also expressed uncertainty as to how the EDQ specifically could be used by clinicians in their care. Considerations for implementation included mode of administration (paper or electronic) and the importance of communicating EDQ scores with older adults based on individual preferences. CONCLUSIONS: The EDQ possesses sensibility and utility for use among this sample of older adults living with complex health needs in home or clinical care settings.