Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Social Sciences Journal Articles
Peer Review Status: Refereed
Title: Validity of the EASYCare Standard 2010 assessment instrument for self-assessment of health, independence, and well-being of older people living at home in Poland
Author(s): Tobis, Sławomir
Jaracz, Krystyna
Talarska, Dorota
Kropińska, Sylwia
Zasadzka, Ewa
Pawlaczyk, Mariola
Wieczorowska-Tobis, Katarzyna
Philp, Ian
Suwalska, Aleksandra
Keywords: EASYCare
Older people
Functional status
Issue Date: 1-Mar-2018
Citation: Tobis S, Jaracz K, Talarska D, Kropińska S, Zasadzka E, Pawlaczyk M, Wieczorowska-Tobis K, Philp I & Suwalska A (2018) Validity of the EASYCare Standard 2010 assessment instrument for self-assessment of health, independence, and well-being of older people living at home in Poland, European Journal of Ageing, 15 (1), pp. 101-108.
Abstract: EASYCare Standard 2010 is a brief instrument identifying concerns in health, functional independence, and well-being, from older persons’ perspective. It has not previously been validated for self-assessment. Our aim was to determine whether self-assessment (EC1) can give comparable results to an evaluation performed by professionals (EC2), for older people living at home. The study included community-dwelling individuals (aged at least 60 years, n = 100; 67 females) without dementia (abbreviated mental test score [AMTS] above 6). It comprised two assessments (self and professional), including summarising indexes: Independence score [IS], Risk of breakdown in care [RBC], Risk of falls [RF], performed within a period between 1 and 2 weeks. Additionally, during EC1, reference tests of physical and mental function (Barthel Index: 96.3 ± 6.5, Lawton scale: 6.7 ± 2.0, geriatric depression scale: 3.0 ± 2.7, AMTS: 10.2 ± 1.0) were applied to test for concurrent validity. Cohen’s kappa values (self-assessment vs. professional assessment) across all EASYCare domains were high (0.89–0.95). Results of all summarising indexes derived from self-assessment correlated strongly with reference tests. No differences were found in IS and RBC between EC1 and EC2 (8.6 ± 12.0 vs. 9.0 ± 12.7 and 1.0 ± 1.1 vs. 1.2 ± 1.4). Results of RF were higher in EC2 (1.0 ± 1.1 vs. 1.1 ± 1.4; p = 0.005), due to a different response to the item “Do you feel safe outside your home?” We conclude that self-assessment with EASYCare Standard in older people without severe functional impairment living at home can deliver valid results, similar to those obtained through professional assessment, thus providing an efficient system for assessment of relatively independent individuals.
DOI Link: 10.1007/s10433-017-0422-7
Rights: © The Author(s) 2017 This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Tobis2018_Article_ValidityOfTheEASYCareStandard2.pdfFulltext - Published Version396.52 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

This item is protected by original copyright

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.