發(fā)布時間：2018-01-13 14:11

  本文關鍵詞：重癥肌無力嚴重程度量表的研制與考核　出處：《青島大學》2017年博士論文　論文類型：學位論文

  更多相關文章： 重癥肌無力 量表 Delphi法 信度 效度

【摘要】：目的:研制適合我國臨床使用的重癥肌無力(MG)嚴重程度量表。方法:1.根據(jù)4個國內外常用的MG嚴重程度量表(QMGs、MGC、MMS和ARS-MG)建立條目池,結合收集的5位獨立觀察者對60例MG患者評分的數(shù)據(jù),采用Delphi法調查國內MG領域專家的意見,來自全國21個MG中心的32位專家組成議題小組參與調查,本課題組研究者組成核心小組,負責完成調查并形成初始量表。完成第一輪調查后,向專家反饋第一輪調查意見匯總及前期評價中各條目在原始量表中的表現(xiàn),進行第二輪調查,選擇第二輪調查結果中專家推薦一致性高且前期評價好的條目,建立初始量表。2.使用這60例MG患者的測評數(shù)據(jù),用條目的觀察者間信度、條目對Cronbachɑ系數(shù)的作用、條目相關系數(shù)和因子分析法篩選條目,編制完整量表。3.對形成的完整量表,評價每個條目的觀察者間信度,量表的內部一致性、量表的觀察者間信度和重測信度、量表的結構效度和量表的效標關聯(lián)效度。4.選取完整量表中患者能自行評價的條目形成自評量表,并評價其內部一致性、觀察者間信度、重測信度、結構效度和效標關聯(lián)效度。結果:1.核心小組擬定的條目池包含來自上述4個量表的19個條目。兩輪專家調查的積極系數(shù)分別為91.4%和96.9%,專家權威系數(shù)分別為0.79和0.80,專家對條目綜合評分的Kendall協(xié)同系數(shù)分別為0.22(P�d0.01)和0.42(P�d0.01)。選取專家支持度高且意見差異小(M為3且IQR≤1)的條目,并增加復視的條目,形成初始量表,包括10個條目。2.對初始量表進行評價后,因觀察者間信度表現(xiàn)差刪除1個條目(瞼裂),其他9個條目構成完整量表,涉及眼肌、球部肌、面肌、四肢肌、中軸肌和呼吸肌6個肌群。3.評價完整量表,各條目的觀察者間信度較好(К=0.43~0.80,P�d0.01)。完整量表的內部一致性較好(Cronbachɑ=0.65),觀察者間信度(ICC=0.89,P�d0.01)和重測信度(ICC=0.87,P�d0.01)均很好;因子分析法顯示量表有4項公因子,累積方差貢獻率68.46%,結構效度良好;量表與MG-ADL、MGC中度相關(r=0.62~0.77,P�d0.01),與QMGs、ARS-MG高度相關(r=0.86~0.89,P�d0.01)。4.刪除眼肌和面肌條目形成自評量表,包括6個條目,涉及球部肌、四肢肌、中軸肌和呼吸肌4個肌群。自評量表的內部一致性較好(Cronbachɑ=0.77),觀察者間信度和重測信度(ICC均為0.93,P�d0.01)很好;因子分析法顯示自評量表有2項公因子,累積方差貢獻率64.24%,結構效度較好;自評量表與ARS-MG、完整量表高度相關(r=0.80~0.82,P�d0.01),與MG-ADL、QMGs、MGC中度相關(r=0.51~0.75,P�d0.01)。結論:采用Delphi法結合前期條目評價篩選出代表性條目,形成全面反映MG嚴重程度的初始量表,采用多種考評方法進一步篩選條目后形成完整量表,選取完整量表中患者能自行評價條目形成自評量表。完整量表和自評量表均有良好的信度和效度,能可靠有效地評價MG的嚴重程度。
[Abstract]:Objective: to prepare for our clinical use of myasthenia gravis (MG) severity scale. Methods: 1. according to the 4 commonly used at home and abroad MG severity scale (QMGs, MGC, MMS and ARS-MG) the item pool with the collection of 5 independent observers on 60 cases of patients with MG score according to the number of using Delphi method, investigation of domestic MG domain experts, 32 experts from the 21 MG center consists of focus group involved in the investigation, the research group composed of the core group, responsible for the completion of the investigation and formed the initial scale. After the completion of the first round of survey, feedback each item the first round of the survey and summary views of previous evaluations in the original scale in the second round of expert investigation, expert selection of the second round survey recommended high consistency and pre evaluation items, establish the initial scale of.2. using the 60 cases of MG were observed by the evaluation data, a purpose The role of inter rater reliability, Cronbach alpha coefficient entries, entries correlation coefficient and factor analysis method to screen items, the preparation of complete scale.3. to complete the formation of the amount of each item, evaluate the interobserver reliability and internal consistency of the scale, the scale of the interobserver reliability and test-retest reliability, construct validity and the scale effect scale criterion related validity of.4. scale to select the complete evaluation in patients with items in the checklist, and evaluate the internal consistency, interobserver reliability, test-retest reliability, construct validity and criterion related validity. Results: 1. the core group proposed item pool contains from the 4 scale and 19 items. The positive coefficient of two rounds of expert investigation were 91.4% and 96.9%, the expert authority coefficient were 0.79 and 0.80, experts on the comprehensive score of the entry Kendall coordination coefficient were 0.22 (P? 0.01) and 0.42 (P? 0.01). Select expert support 搴﹂珮涓旀剰瑙佸樊寮傚皬(M涓，

本文編號：1419170