Article révisé par les pairs
Résumé : Background & Objectives: In Belgium two scales are used to assess disability and dependence of elderly persons (INAMI scale and APA scale). In France, dependence is assessed by the "Autonomie Gerontologie Groupes Isoressources" (AGGIR) scale. However, none of these tools has been validated according to metrological standards. This article presents the data of four surveys conducted in order to compare validity of the three scales. Methods: Content validity was assessed using ICF as reference, by experts' consensus. Concurrent validity between the scales was evaluated using ordinal and linear regressions ; the ability of the scales to distinguish different nursing home populations was evaluated using chi square test and means comparisons (Mann-Whitney U); concomitant validity with nursing care load was tested using categorical and linear regressions; discriminant validity using one way variance analysis. Reliability was analyzed using Cronbach's α, ICC, Cohen's k and Kruskal and Goodman's γ coefficients. Results: Content validity: INAMI scale is ICF-related and measures needs for care; APA scale is ICF related and measures incapacities; AGGIR is ICF-related and measures performance in the activities in daily living. Concurrent validity shows Pearson's R 2 and Kendall's tau-b values >0,6; capacity of the scales to distinguish different populations shows significant chi square tests (p<0,05) and significant differences between indicator's means; concomitant validity shows R 2 >0,6; analysis of discriminant validity sho ws that all categories of INAMI and APA scales are not significantly different. However, this is not the case for those of AGGIR scale. Reliability analysis shows all Cronbach's α>0,8; all CCI>0,7; k >0,6 for INAMI scale and AGGIR and >0,5 for APA; γ>0,8. Conclusion: Both INAMI and AGGIR scales are valid however INAMI scale is less discriminant. APA scale is not valid enough to measure dependence.