Journal of Rehabilitation Sciences & Research

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Editorial Board

Publication Ethics

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

Peer Review Process

News

Psychometric Evaluation of the Persian Version of the Dysexecutive Questionnaire in Methamphetamine-Abstinent Individuals

Document Type : Original Articles

Authors

1 Department of Occupational Therapy, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

2 Institute for Cognitive Sciences Studies (ICSS), Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Background: Methamphetamine addiction is a growing global concern associated with executive dysfunctions that negatively impact daily life. Traditional tests for assessing executive dysfunctions are often complex and time-consuming. Therefore, a valid, reliable, and simple instrument to assess these dysfunctions is crucial. This study aimed to assess the psychometric properties of the Persian version of the Dysexecutive Questionnaire in methamphetamine-abstinent individuals.
Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 100 participants aged 20 to 50, selected via convenience sampling. The Dysexecutive Questionnaire (informant and occupational therapist ratings), Behavioral Assessment of the Dysexecutive Syndrome, Stroop test, Wisconsin Card Sorting test, and Tower of London task were used to evaluate the participants. The study examined the face validity, convergent validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and inter-rater reliability of the Dysexecutive Questionnaire. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS v.23.0 at a significance level 0.05.
Results: The Dysexecutive Questionnaire demonstrated acceptable face validity (impact score: 1.95 to 3.86). Convergent validity was supported by significant correlations between the Dysexecutive Questionnaire - informant rating and other assessment tools (p < 0.001). The questionnaire showed good to excellent internal consistency (Dysexecutive Questionnaire - occupational therapist rating: α = 0.91; Dysexecutive Questionnaire - informant rating: α = 0.87). The test-retest reliability was high for the occupational therapist rating (ICC = 0.911) and informant rating (ICC = 0.925). Inter-rater reliability was also excellent (ICC = 0.980).
Conclusion: The Dysexecutive Questionnaire - informant rating is a reliable and valid instrument for evaluating dysexecutive symptoms in methamphetamine-abstinent individuals.
 
 

Highlights

Keywords

References
  1. Degenhardt L, Sara G, McKetin R, Roxburgh A, Dobbins T, Farrell M, et al. Crystalline methamphetamine use and methamphetamine‐related harms in Australia. Drug and Alcohol Review. 2017;36(2):160-70.
  2. Homer BD, Solomon TM, Moeller RW, Mascia A, DeRaleau L, Halkitis PN. Methamphetamine abuse and impairment of social functioning: a review of the underlying neurophysiological causes and behavioral implications. Psychological bulletin. 2008;134(2):301.
  3. Henry BL, Minassian A, Perry W. Effect of methamphetamine dependence on everyday functional ability. Addictive behaviors. 2010;35(6):593-8.
  4. Rendell PG, Mazur M, Henry JD. Prospective memory impairment in former users of methamphetamine. Psychopharmacology. 2009;203(3):609-16.
  5. Sadek JR, Vigil O, Grant I, Heaton RK, group H. The impact of neuropsychological functioning and depressed mood on functional complaints in HIV-1 infection and methamphetamine dependence. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology. 2007;29(3):266-76.
  6. Barr AM, Panenka WJ, MacEwan GW, Thornton AE, Lang DJ, Honer WG, et al. The need for speed: an update on methamphetamine addiction. Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience. 2006;31(5):301.
  7. Scott JC, Woods SP, Matt GE, Meyer RA, Heaton RK, Atkinson JH, et al. Neurocognitive effects of methamphetamine: a critical review and meta-analysis. Neuropsychology review. 2007;17(3):275-97.
  8. Johanson C-E, Frey KA, Lundahl LH, Keenan P, Lockhart N, Roll J, et al. Cognitive function and nigrostriatal markers in abstinent methamphetamine abusers. Psychopharmacology. 2006;185(3):327-38.
  9. Salo R, Nordahl TE, Possin K, Leamon M, Gibson DR, Galloway GP, et al. Preliminary evidence of reduced cognitive inhibition in methamphetamine-dependent individuals. Psychiatry research. 2002;111(1):65-74.
  10. Farhadian M, Akbarfahimi M, Abharian PH, Hosseini SG, Shokri S. Assessment of executive functions in methamphetamine-addicted individuals: Emphasis on duration of addiction and abstinence. Basic and Clinical Neuroscience. 2017;8(2):147.
  11. Gorelick DA, Levin KH, Copersino ML, Heishman SJ, Liu F, Boggs DL, et al. Diagnostic criteria for cannabis withdrawal syndrome. Drug and alcohol dependence. 2012;123(1-3):141-7.
  12. Burgess PW, Shallice T. Response suppression, initiation and strategy use following frontal lobe lesions. Neuropsychologia. 1996;34(4):263-72.
  13. Robbins TW. Shifting and stopping: fronto-striatal substrates, neurochemical modulation and clinical implications. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences. 2007;362(1481):917-32.
  14. Stuss DT, Levine B. Adult clinical neuropsychology: lessons from studies of the frontal lobes. Annual review of psychology. 2002;53(1):401-33.
  15. Burgess PW, Alderman N, Forbes C, Costello A, MA COATES L, Dawson DR, et al. The case for the development and use of “ecologically valid” measures of executive function in experimental and clinical neuropsychology. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society. 2006;12(02):194-209.
  16. Quinn AC, Bhargava D, Al-Tamimi YZ, Clark MJ, Ross SA, Tennant A. Self-perceived health status following aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage: a cohort study. BMJ open. 2014;4(4):e003932.
  17. Chan RC, Chen EY. Assessment of executive function for schizophrenia in Hong Kong. Hong Kong Journal of Psychiatry. 2005;15(1):23.
  18. Llanero-Luque M, Ruiz-Sánchez de León J, Pedrero-Pérez E, Olivar-Arroyo A, Bouso-Saiz J, Rojo-Mota G, et al. Sintomatología disejecutiva en adictos a sustancias en tratamiento mediante la versión española del cuestionario disejecutivo (DEX-Sp). Revista de Neurología. 2008;47(9):457-63.
  19. Piquard A, Derouesné C, Meininger V, Lacomblez L. [DEX and executive dysfunction in activities of daily living in Alzheimer's disease and frontotemporal dementia]. Psychologie & neuropsychiatrie du vieillissement. 2010;8(3):215-24; quiz 25-7.
  20. Shinagawa Y, Nakaaki S, Hongo J, Murata Y, Sato J, Matsui T, et al. Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the Dysexecutive Questionnaire (DEX) in Alzheimer's disease: validation of a behavioral rating scale to assess dysexecutive symptoms in Japanese patients with Alzheimer's disease. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry: A journal of the psychiatry of late life and allied sciences. 2007;22(10):951-6.
  21. Wilson B, Alderman N, Burgess P, Emslie H, Evans J. Behavioral Assessment of the Dysexecutive Syndrome Thames Valley Test Company. London[Google Scholar]. 1996.
  22. Burgess PW, Alderman N, Evans J, Emslie H, Wilson BA. The ecological validity of tests of executive function. Journal of the international neuropsychological society. 1998;4(6):547-58.
  23. Mooney B, Walmsley C, McFarland K. Factor analysis of the self-report Dysexecutive (DEX-S) Questionnaire. Applied Neuropsychology. 2006;13(1):12-8.
  24. Wilson B, Alderman N, Burgess P, Emslie H, Evans J. BADS–DEX (Dysexecutive questionnaire). GB, London: Harcourt Assesment; 1996.
  25. Heaton RK. Wisconsin card sorting test: computer version 2. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources. 1993.
  26. MacLeod CM. Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: an integrative review. Psychological bulletin. 1991;109(2):163.
  27. Krikorian R, Bartok J, Gay N. Tower of London procedure: a standard method and developmental data. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology. 1994;16(6):840-50.
  28. Vakili MM, Jahangiri N. Content validity and reliability of the measurement tools in educational, behavioral, and health sciences research. Journal of Medical Education Development. 2018;10(28):106-18.
  29. Wilson BA, Evans JJ, Alderman N, Burgess PW, Emslie H. Behavioural assessment of the dysexecutive syndrome. Methodology of frontal and executive function. 1997:239-50.
  30. Bennett PC, Ong B, Ponsford J. Measuring executive dysfunction in an acute rehabilitation setting: Using the dysexecutive questionnaire (DEX). Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society. 2005;11(4):376-85.
  31. Norris G, Tate RL. The Behavioural Assessment of the Dysexecutive Syndrome (BADS): Ecological, concurrent and construct validity. Neuropsychological rehabilitation. 2000;10(1):33-45.
  32. Burgess P, Alderman N, Wilson B, Evans J, Emslie H. The dysexecutive questionnaire. Behavioural assessment of the dysexecutive syndrome Bury St Edmunds, UK: Thames Valley Test Company. 1996.
  33. Wood RL, Liossi C. The ecological validity of executive tests in a severely brain injured sample. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology. 2006;21(5):429-37.
  34. Bennett PC, Ong B, Ponsford J. Assessment of executive dysfunction following traumatic brain injury: Comparison of the BADS with other clinical neuropsychological measures. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society. 2005;11(05):606-13.
  35. Stuss DT, Benson DF. The frontal lobes: Raven Pr; 1986.
  36. Stuss DT, Gow CA, Hetherington CR. " No longer Gage": frontal lobe dysfunction and emotional changes. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology. 1992;60(3):349.
  37. Shallice T, Burgess PW. Deficits in strategy application following frontal lobe damage in man. Brain. 1991;114(2):727-41.
  38. Burgess PW. Theory and methodology in executive function research. Methodology of frontal and executive function. 1997:81-116.
  39. Shinagawa Y, Nakaaki S, Hongo J, Murata Y, Sato J, Matsui T, et al. Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the Dysexecutive Questionnaire (DEX) in Alzheimer's disease: validation of a behavioral rating scale to assess dysexecutive symptoms in Japanese patients with Alzheimer's disease. International journal of geriatric psychiatry. 2007;22(10):951-6.
  40. Barker LA, Morton N, Morrison TG, McGuire BE. Inter-rater reliability of the Dysexecutive Questionnaire (DEX): comparative data from non-clinician respondents-all raters are not equal. Brain Injury. 2011;25(10):997-1004.

 

Journal of Rehabilitation Sciences & Research
Volume 11, Issue 4
December 2024
Pages 215-220
Files
Share
How to cite
Statistics