Abstract
Introduction Non-verbal communication remains a relatively unexplored area in dementia care with a lack of validated assessment tools available to measure non-verbal communication function in dementia.
Methods This scoping review identifies assessment scales of nonverbal communication in dementia and evaluates the psychometric properties and clinical utility of these instruments. Relevant publications in English, from 1947 to 2017, were identified through an extensive search strategy in Medline, Psychinfo and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), EMBASE, Cochrane and generic search engines (Google) and available off-line resources. Quality judgement criteria was formulated and used to evaluate the psychometric aspects of the scales.
Results Forty-one tools were identified measuring various communication channels including verbal, nonverbal (e.g., facial expressions, gestures, eye contact) and functional, communication means; within various settings and populations, for instance, those assessing cognition and verbal language difficulties secondary to stroke, aphasia and nonverbal cues associated with pain. A number of tools presented psychometrics qualities; only nine of the forty-one tools specifically focussed on nonverbal communication, however, comprehensive assessment of nonverbal communication function was not presented in majority of the identified tools. Two tools provided a detailed assessment of nonverbal communication, the Emory dyssemia Index (EDI) and the Threadgold Communication Tool (TCT).
Conclusion Based on the psychometric qualities and criteria regarding sensitivity and clinical utility, we concluded that although it is difficult to recommend one particular tool, the EDI and TCT are the most appropriate scales currently available. Further research should focus on improving these scales by further testing their validity, reliability and clinical utility in dementia.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
NIHR BRC at SLaM NHS and King's College London
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The literature review of part of a study fully approved by Cambridgeshire 3 Ethics Committee Panel (REC Reference 09/HO306/53
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article [and/or] its supplementary materials.
