Patient Name : Kiki Nur Safitri Date : Wednesday ,06 April 2021

Patient ID : 1902405

Katz Index of Independence in Activities of Daily

Living
Activities Independen Dependen
Points (1 or 0) ce ce
(1 Point) (0 Points)

NO supervision, direction or WITH supervision, direction,

personal assistance. personal assistance or total
care.
BATHING (1 POINT) Bathes self completely (0 POINTS) Need help with
or needs help in bathing only a bathing more than one part of
Points: 1 single part of the body such as the the body, getting in or out of the
back, genital area or disabled tub or shower. Requires total
extremity. bathing
DRESSING (1 POINT) Get clothes from closets (0 POINTS) Needs help with
and drawers and puts on clothes and dressing self or needs to be
Points: 0 outer garments complete with completely dressed.
fasteners. May have help tying shoes.

TOILETING (1 POINT) Goes to toilet, gets on (0 POINTS) Needs help

and off, arranges clothes, cleans transferring to the toilet,
Points: 1 genital area without help. cleaning self or uses bedpan or
commode.
TRANSFERRING (1 POINT) Moves in and out of bed (0 POINTS) Needs help in
or chair unassisted. Mechanical moving from bed to chair or
Points: 0 transfer aids are acceptable requires a complete transfer.

CONTINENCE (1 POINT) Exercises complete self (0 POINTS) Is partially or

control over urination and totally incontinent of bowel or
Points: 1 defecation. bladder
FEEDING (1 POINT) Gets food from plate into (0 POINTS) Needs partial or
mouth without help. Preparation of total help with feeding or
Points: 1 food may be done by another person. requires parenteral feeding.

TOTAL POINTS: 4 SCORING: 4 = High (patient independent) 2 = Low (patient very dependent

Source:
try this: Best Practices in Nursing Care to Older Adults, The Hartford Institute for Geriatric Nursing, New York University, College of
Nursing, www.hartfordign.org.
Patient Name: Date:
Patient ID #
LAWTON - BRODY
INSTRUMENTAL ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING SCALE
(I.A.D.L.)
Scoring: For each category, circle the item description that most closely resembles the client’s highest
functional level (either 0 or 1).

A. Ability to Use Telephone E. Laundry

1. Operates telephone on own initiative- 1 1. Does personal laundry completely 1
looks up and dials numbers, etc. 2. Launders small items-rinses stockings, etc. 1
2. Dials a few well-known numbers 1 3. All laundry must be done by others 0
3. Answers telephone but does not dial 1
4. Does not use telephone at all 0
B. Shopping F. Mode of Transportation
1. Takes care of all shopping 1 1. Travels independently on public transportation 1
needs independently or drives own car
2. Shops independently for small purchases 0 2. Arranges own travel via taxi, but does 1
3. Needs to be accompanied on any 0 not otherwise use public transportation
shopping trip 3. Travels on public transportation 1
4. Completely unable to shop 0 when accompanied by another
4. Travel limited to taxi or automobile 0
with assistance of another
5. Does not travel at all 0
C. Food Preparation G. Responsibility for Own Medications
1. Plans, prepares and serves adequate 1 1. Is responsible for taking medication in 1
meals independently correct dosages at correct time
2. Prepares adequate meals if supplied 0 2. Takes responsibility if medication is prepared 0
with ingredients in advance in separate dosage
3. Heats, serves and prepares meals, or 0 3. Is not capable of dispensing own medication 0
prepares meals, or prepares meals but
does not maintain adequate diet
4. Needs to have meals prepared and served 0
D. Housekeeping H. Ability to Handle Finances
1. Maintains house alone or with occasional 1 1. Manages financial matters independently 1
assistance (e.g. "heavy work domestic (budgets, writes checks, pays rent, bills, goes
help") 1 to bank), collects and keeps track of income
2. Performs light daily tasks such as 2. Manages day-to-day purchases, but needs 1
dish washing, bed making 1 help with banking, major purchases, etc.
3.Performs light daily tasks but cannot 3. Incapable of handling money 0
maintain acceptable level of 1
cleanliness
4. Needs help with all home 0
maintenance tasks
5. Does not participate in any
housekeeping tasks

Score Score
Total score
A summary score ranges from 0 (low function, dependent) to 8 (high function, independent) for
women and 0 through 5 for men to avoid potential gender bias.
Source: try this: Best Practices in Nursing Care to Older Adults, The Hartford Institute for Geriatric Nursing,
New York University, College of Nursing, www.hartfordign.org.
 general assessment series

Best Practices in Nursing Care to Older Adults

From The Hartford Institute for Geriatric Nursing, New York University, College of Nursing

Issue Number 2, Revised 2007 Series Editor: Marie Boltz, PhD, GNP-BC
Series Co-Editor: Sherry A. Greenberg, MSN, GNP-BC
New York University College of Nursing

Katz Index of Independence in Activities of Daily Living (ADL)

By: Meredith Wallace, PhD, APRN, BC, Fairfield University School of Nursing, and Mary Shelkey, PhD,
ARNP, Virginia Mason Medical Center

WHY: Normal aging changes and health problems frequently show themselves as declines in the functional status of older adults.
Decline may place the older adult on a spiral of iatrogenesis leading to further health problems. One of the best ways to evaluate the
health status of older adults is through functional assessment which provides objective data that may indicate future decline or
improvement in health status, allowing the nurse to intervene appropriately.

BEST TOOL: The Katz Index of Independence in Activities of Daily Living, commonly referred to as the Katz ADL, is the most
appropriate instrument to assess functional status as a measurement of the client’s ability to perform activities of daily living
independently. Clinicians typically use the tool to detect problems in performing activities of daily living and to plan care
accordingly. The Index ranks adequacy
of performance in the six functions of bathing, dressing, toileting, transferring, continence, and feeding. Clients are scored yes/no
for independence in each of the six functions. A score of 6 indicates full function, 4 indicates moderate impairment, and 2 or less
indicates severe functional impairment.

TARGET POPULATION: The instrument is most effectively used among older adults in a variety of care settings, when
baseline measurements, taken when the client is well, are compared to periodic or subsequent measures.

VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY: In the thirty-five years since the instrument has been developed, it has been modified and
simplified and different approaches to scoring have been used. However, it has consistently demonstrated its utility in evaluating
functional status in the elderly population. Although no formal reliability and validity reports could be found in the literature, the tool
is used extensively as a flag signaling functional capabilities of older adults in clinical and home environments.

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: The Katz ADL Index assesses basic activities of daily living. It does not assess more advanced
activities of daily living. Katz developed another scale for instrumental activities of daily living such as heavy housework, shopping,
managing finances and telephoning. Although the Katz ADL Index is sensitive to changes in declining health status, it is limited in
its ability to measure small increments of change seen in the rehabilitation of older adults. A full comprehensive geriatric assessment
should follow when appropriate. The Katz ADL Index is very useful in creating a common language about patient function for all
practitioners involved in overall care planning and discharge planning.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

Best practice information on care of older adults: www.ConsultGeriRN.org.
Graf, C. (2006). Functional decline in hospitalized older adults. AJN, 106(1), 58-67.
Katz, S., Down, T.D., Cash, H.R., & Grotz, R.C. (1970) Progress in the development of the index of ADL. The Gerontologist,
10(1), 20-30. Katz, S. (1983). Assessing self-maintenance: Activities of daily living, mobility and instrumental activities of daily
living.
JAGS, 31(12), 721-726.
Kresevic, D.M., & Mezey, M. (2003). Assessment of function. In M. Mezey, T. Fulmer, I. Abraham (Eds.), D. Zwicker (Managing Ed.),
Geriatric nursing protocols for best practice (2nd ed., pp 31-46). NY: Springer Publishing Co., Inc.
Mick, D.J., & Ackerman, M.H. (2004, Sept). Critical care nursing for older adults: Pathophysiological and functional considerations.
Nursing Clinics of North America, 39(3), 473-93.

Permission is hereby granted to reproduce, post, download, and/or distribute, this material in its entirety only for not-for-profit educational purposes only, provided that
The Hartford Institute for Geriatric Nursing, New York University, College of Nursing is cited as the source. This material may be downloaded and/or distributed in electronic
format, including PDA format. Available on the internet at www.hartfordign.org and/or www.ConsultGeriRN.org. E-mail notification of usage to: [email protected].
 Issue Number 23, Revised 2007 Series Editor: Marie Boltz, PhD, APRN, BC, GNP
Managing Editor: Sherry A. Greenberg, MSN, APRN, BC,
GNP New York University College of Nursing

The Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) Scale

By: Carla Graf, MS, APRN, BC, University of California, San Francisco
WHY: The assessment of functional status is critical when caring for older adults. Normal aging changes, acute illness, worsening chronic
illness, and hospitalization can contribute to a decline in the ability to perform tasks necessary to live independently in the community. The
information from a functional assessment can provide objective data to assist with targeting individualized rehabilitation needs or to plan
for specific in home services such as meal preparation, nursing care, home-maker services, personal care, or continuous supervision. A
functional assessment can also assist the clinician to focus on the person’s baseline capabilities, facilitating early recognition of changes that
may signify a need either for additional resources or for a medical work-up (Gallo, 2006).

BEST TOOL: The Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Scale (IADL) is an appropriate instrument to assess independent living
skills (Lawton & Brody, 1969). These skills are considered more complex than the basic activities of daily living as measured by the Katz
Index of ADLs (See Try this: Katz Index of ADLs). The instrument is most useful for identifying how a person is functioning at the present
time, and to identify improvement or deterioration over time. There are eight domains of function measured with the Lawton IADL scale.
Women are scored on all 8 areas of function; historically, for men, the areas of food preparation, housekeeping, laundering are excluded.
Clients are scored according to their highest level of functioning in that category. A summary score ranges from 0 (low function,
dependent) to 8 (high function, independent) for women, and 0 through 5 for men.

TARGET POPULATION: This instrument is intended to be used among older adults, and can be used in community or hospital
settings. The instrument is not useful for institutionalized older adults. It can be used as a baseline assessment tool and to compare
baseline function to periodic assessments.

VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY: Few studies have been performed to test the Lawton IADL scale psychometric properties. The Lawton IADL
Scale was originally tested concurrently with the Physical Self-Maintenance Scale (PSMS). Reliability was established with twelve subjects
interviewed by one interviewer with the second rater present but not participating in the interview process. Inter-rater reliability was
established at .85. The validity of the Lawton IADL was tested by determining the correlation of the Lawton IADL with four scales that
measured domains of functional status, the Physical Classification (6-point rating of physical health), Mental Status Questionnaire (10-
point test of orientation and memory), Behavior and Adjustment rating scales (4-6-point measure of intellectual, person, behavioral and
social adjustment), and the PSMS (6-item ADLs). A total of 180 research subjects participated in the study, however, few received all five
evaluations. All correlations were significant at the .01 or .05 level. To avoid potential gender bias at the time the instrument was
developed, specific items were omitted for men. This assessment instrument is widely used both in research and in clinical practice.

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: The Lawton IADL is an easy to administer assessment instrument that provides self-reported
information about functional skills necessary to live in the community. Administration time is 10-15 minutes. Specific deficits identified can
assist nurses and other disciplines in planning for safe discharge.
Limitations of the instrument can include the self-report or surrogate report method of administration rather than a demonstration of
the functional task. This may lead either to over-estimation or under-estimation of ability. In addition, the instrument may not be
sensitive to small, incremental changes in function.

FOLLOW-UP: The identification of new disabilities in these functional domains warrants intervention and further assessment to
prevent ongoing decline and to promote safe living conditions for older adults. If using the Lawton IADL tool with an acute
hospitalization, nurses should communicate any deficits to the physicians and social workers/case managers for appropriate discharge
planning.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

Best practice information on care of older adults: www.ConsultGeriRN.org.
Gallo, J.J., & Paveza, G.J. (2006). Activities of daily living and instrumental activities of daily living assessment. In J.J. Gallo, H.R. Bogner, T.
Fulmer, & G.J. Paveza (Eds.), Handbook of Geriatric Assessment (4th ed., pp. 193-240). MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
Graf, C. (2006). Functional decline in hospitalized older adults. AJN, 106(1), 58-67.
Lawton, M.P., & Brody, E.M. (1969). Assessment of older people: Self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. The Gerontologist,
9(3), 179-186.
Pearson, V. (2000). Assessment of function. In R. Kane, & R. Kane (Eds.), Assessing Older Persons. Measures, Meaning and Practical Applications
(pp. 17-48). New York: Oxford University Press.

Permission is hereby granted to reproduce, post, download, and/or distribute, this material in its entirety only for not-for-profit educational purposes only, provided
that The Hartford Institute for Geriatric Nursing, College of Nursing, New York University is cited as the source. This material may be downloaded and/or distributed in
electronic
format, including PDA format. Available on the internet at www.hartfordign.org and/or www.ConsultGeriRN.org. E-mail notification of usage to: [email protected].

[email protected] AJN ▼ April 2008 ▼ Vol. 108, No. 4 59

