以质量求发展，以服务铸品牌

护理学报 ›› 2022, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (21): 61-66.doi: 10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2022.21.061

• 临床护理-内科护理 • 上一篇    下一篇

3种神经病理性疼痛筛查量表在中轴型脊柱关节炎患者中的评价

廖文佳1,2, 何懿3, 孙尔维3, 李漓1   

  1. 1.南方医科大学珠江医院 临床护理教研室,广东 广州 510282;
    2.南方医科大学 护理学院,广东 广州 510515;
    3.南方医科大学第三附属医院 风湿免疫科,广东 广州 510630
  • 收稿日期:2022-05-07 出版日期:2022-11-10 发布日期:2022-12-07
  • 通讯作者: 李漓（1971-）,女,湖南邵东人,博士,主任护师,副教授,临床护理教研室主任。E-mail:lli1@smu.edu.cn
  • 作者简介:廖文佳（1997-）,女,湖北咸宁人,硕士,护士。

Evaluation of Three Neuropathic Pain Screening Scales in Patients with Axial Spondyloarthritis

LIAO Wen-jia1,2, HE Yi3, SUN Er-wei3, LI Li1   

  1. 1. Clinical Nursing Education and Research Section, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510282, China;
    2. School of Nursing, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510515, China;
    3. Dept. of Rheumatology and Immunology, the Third Affiliated Hospital of Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510630, China
  • Received:2022-05-07 Online:2022-11-10 Published:2022-12-07

PDF (PC)

64

赞

摘要： 目的 比较3种神经病理性疼痛筛查量表在中轴型脊柱关节炎患者中的信度、效度和适用性。方法 采用painDETECT问卷、神经病理性疼痛4问卷和利兹神经病理性症状和体征评估疼痛量表对186例中轴型脊柱关节炎患者进行调查,评价量表的信度和效度。结果 painDETECT问卷、神经病理性疼痛4问卷和利兹神经病理性症状和体征评估疼痛量表的Cronbach α系数分别为0.807,0.697和0.623, Guttman分半系数分别为0.846、0.691和0.701。painDETECT问卷共提取2个公因子,累计方差贡献率55.171%。神经病理性疼痛4问卷共提取4个公因子,累计方差贡献率66.627%。利兹神经病理性症状和体征评估疼痛量表共提取2个公因子,累计方差贡献率50.836%。3种量表评估结果一致性Kappa值和相关性r值均大于0.500。患者对3种量表首选率分别为71.5%、3.2%和14.0%。结论 painDETECT问卷信度和效度良好,首选率最高。其余2种量表信度尚可,效度良好。3种量表一致性与相关性较强。

关键词: 脊柱关节炎, 神经病理性疼痛, painDETECT问卷, 神经病理性疼痛4问卷, 利兹神经病理性症状和体征评估疼痛量表, 信度, 效度

Abstract: Objective To compare the reliability, validity and applicability of three neuropathic pain screening scales in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). Methods One hundred and eighty-six patients with axSpA were surveyed using PainDETECT Questionnaire (PD-Q), Douleur Neuropathique 4 (DN4) Questionnaire and Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (LANSS) pain scale, and the reliability and validity of the scales were evaluated. Results The Cronbach’s α coefficient of the PD-Q, the DN4 and the LANSS was 0.807, 0.697 and 0.623, and the Guttman split-half coefficient 0.846, 0.691 and 0.701, respectively. Two main factors were extracted from the PD-Q, and the total cumulative variance contribution rate was 55.171%. Four main factors were extracted from the DN4, and the total cumulative variance contribution rate was 66.627%. Two main factors were extracted from the LANSS, and the total cumulative variance contribution rate was 50.836%. The Kappa value and correlation coefficient among three scales were over 0.500. The patients’ preference rate of the PD-Q, the DN4 and the LANSS was 71.5%, 3.2%, and 14.0%, respectively. Conclusion With good reliability and validity, the PD-Q is a preferred option by most patients, and the LANSS and the DN4 have good validity and acceptable reliability. All the three scales have strong consistency and correlation.

Key words: spondyloarthritis, neuropathic pain, PainDETECT Questionnaire, Douleur Neuropathique 4 Questionnaire, Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs Pain Scale, reliability, validity

中图分类号: 

  • R473.74
[1] Sieper J, Poddubnyy D.Axial Spondyloarthritis[J]. Lancet, 2017,390(10089):73-84.DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31591-4.
[2] Borman P, Kaygisiz F, Yaman A.Neuropathic Component of Low Back Pain in Patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis[J]. Modern Rheumatology, 2021, 31(2):462-467.DOI:10.1080/14397595.2020.1754322.
[3] Zhou L, Li T, Wu X, et al.Assessment of Neuropathic Pain in Ankylosing Spondylitis: Prevalence and Characteristics[J]. Pain Ther, 2021, 10(2):1467-1479. DOI:10.1007/s40122-021-00310-8.
[4] Atar E, Askin A.Somatosensory Dysfunction Related Neuropathic Pain Component Affects Disease Activity, Functional Status and Quality of Life in Ankylosing Spondylitis[J]. Int J Rheum Dis, 2020,23(12):1656-1663.DOI:10.1111/1756-185x.13993.
[5] Jensen TS, Baron R, Haanpää M, et al.A New Definition of Neuropathic Pain[J]. Pain, 2011,152(10):2204-2205.DOI:10.1016/j.pain.2011.06.017.
[6] Pathan EMI, Inman RD.Pain in Spondyloarthritis: A Neuro-immune Interaction[J]. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol,2017,31(6):830-845.DOI:10.1016/j.berh.2018.07.003.
[7] 周围神经病理性疼痛中国专家共识编委会.周围神经病理性疼痛诊疗中国专家共识[J]. 中国疼痛医学杂志, 2020,26(5):321-328.
[8] 陈向军. 神经病理性疼痛诊断量表[J]. 中国现代神经疾病杂志, 2013,13(9):747-751.
[9] Attal N, Bouhassira D, Baron R.Diagnosis and Assessment of Neuropathic Pain through Questionnaires[J]. Lancet Neurol, 2018,17(5):456-466.DOI:10.1016/S1474-4422(18)30071-1.
[10] Freynhagen R, Baron R, Gockel U, et al.painDETECT: A New Screening Questionnaire to Identify Neuropathic Components in Patients with Back Pain[J]. Curr Med Res Opin, 2006,22(10):1911-1920.DOI:10.1185/030079906x132488.
[11] Bouhassira D, Attal N, Alchaar H, et al.Comparison of Pain Syndromes Associated with Nervous or Somatic Lesions and Development of a New Neuropathic Pain Diagnostic Questionnaire (DN4)[J]. Pain, 2005,114(1-2):29-36.DOI:10.1016/j.pain.2004.12.010.
[12] Bennett M.The LANSS Pain Scale: the Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs[J]. Pain, 2001,92(1-2):147-157.DOI:10.1016/s0304-3959(00)00482-6.
[13] Kisler LB, Kim JA, Hemington KS, et al.Abnormal Alpha Band Power in the Dynamic Pain Connectome Is a Marker of Chronic Pain with a Neuropathic Component[J]. Neuroimage Clin,2020,26:102241.DOI:10.1016/j.nicl.2020.102241.
[14] Li J, Feng Y, Han J, et al.Linguistic Adaptation, Validation and Comparison of 3 Routinely Used Neuropathic Pain Questionnaires[J]. Pain Physician, 2012,15(2):179-186.
[15] Chen J, Li L.Validation of Neuropathic Pain Assessment Tools among Chinese Patients with Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy[J]. Int J Nurs Sci, 2016,3(2):139-145.DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnss.2016.04.005.
[16] 熊淑华. painDetect量表的汉化及其在疱疹相关性疼痛中的应用[D]. 上海:复旦大学, 2013.
[17] Ji Y, He Y, Nian X, et al.Inflammatory or Neuropathic Pain: Characteristics and Their Relationships with Disease Activity and Functional Status in Axial Spondyloarthritis Patients[J]. Pain Med, 2019,20(5):882-888.DOI:10.1093/pm/pny138.
[18] Sousa VD, Rojjanasrirat W.Translation, Adaptation and Validation of Instruments or Scales for Use in Cross-cultural Health Care Research: A Clear and User-friendly Guideline[J]. J Eval Clin Pract, 2011,17(2):268-274.DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01434.x.
[19] Flack VF, Afifi AA, Lachenbruch PA, et al.Sample Size Determinations for the Two Rater Kappa Statistic[J]. Psychometrika,1988,53(3):321-325.DOI:10.1007/bf02294215.
[20] 李君, 冯艺, 韩济生, 等. 三个中文版神经病理性疼痛诊断量表的制定与多中心验证[J]. 中国疼痛医学杂志, 2011,17(9):549-553.
[21] 蒋小花, 沈卓之, 张楠楠, 等. 问卷的信度和效度分析[J]. 现代预防医学, 2010,37(3):429-431.
[22] Taurog JD, Chhabra A, Colbert R A.Ankylosing Spondylitis and Axial Spondyloarthritis[J]. N Engl J Med, 2016,374(26):2563-2574.DOI:10.1056/NEJMra1406182.
[1] 李慧, 潘玲, 李博, 刘晓辉. 患者安全胜任力自评量表的汉化及其在实习护生中的信效度评价[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(9): 47-51.
[2] 罗忠琛, 唐娇, 郑艺平, 胡少锦, 范纪莉, 余静雅. 卫生保健相关后悔应对量表的汉化及其在实习护生中的信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(22): 58-64.
[3] 胡蓉, 宁宁, 陈佳丽, 唐秀美, 李佩芳, 王雅磊, 胡秀英. 皮肤撕裂伤知识评估工具的汉化及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(18): 18-22.
[4] 陈赟, 伍跃婷, 叶美霞, 刘锐, 钟印芹, 程萌, 魏珍娜. 无症状高尿酸血症患者尿酸管理保护动机问卷的编制及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(17): 1-6.
[5] 刘凯莉, 罗艳艳, 姚桂英, 朱智玲, 郭华, 杜诣深, 秦立伟, 吴慧敏, 李佳波. 晚期癌症患者安宁疗护态度量表的汉化及信效度分析[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(16): 11-16.
[6] 徐立敏, 钱志刚. 临床带教教师隐性知识共享量表的编制及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(15): 24-27.
[7] 叶孝灵, 周春兰, 黄丛萍, 刘志红, 吴明秀, 邓水娟, 刘瑜, 杨丽潇, 王润. 脑卒中后失能综合评估量表的汉化与信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(11): 65-69.
[8] 张正敏, 左倩倩, 冯现刚, 梁素娟, 魏红云, 高钰琳. ICU护士职业死亡回避量表的编制及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(1): 53-57.
[9] 王琦, 李领侠, 和巾杰, 郑华东, 米晓芬, 胡艳粉. 医护人员低血糖症知信行问卷的编制及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2021, 28(9): 9-13.
[10] 郑丹丹, 任静, 李艳, 徐倩. 母亲感知育儿自我效能量表的汉化及其在早产儿母亲中的信效度研究[J]. 护理学报, 2021, 28(9): 54-57.
[11] 刘瑜, 周春兰, 周君桂, 邓水娟, 何任红. 神经源性膀胱患者自我管理量表的编制及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2021, 28(7): 64-68.
[12] 信博, 赵秋利, 王楠楠, 马得欣, 邢慧, 吴燕妮, 于洋. 消化系统癌症高危人群预防主动行为测评量表的编制与信效度评价[J]. 护理学报, 2021, 28(5): 6-11.
[13] 夏杰, 段霞, 张佳男, 于婵, 王可可. 高危孕产妇病情预警评估表的构建及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2021, 28(4): 67-72.
[14] 侯艳, 张云, 高蓉, 刘宝吉, 赵卿. 恶性肿瘤患者疼痛认知量表的汉化和信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2021, 28(4): 62-66.
[15] 李艳清, 张晓梅, 徐秀群. Skidmore焦虑病耻感量表的汉化及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2021, 28(24): 17-21.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
[1] 刘媛媛, 刘高明, 胡进, 范洁琳, 邓诗佳. 子宫内膜癌治疗后外阴淋巴水肿患者症状体验与心理感受的质性研究[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(21): 1 -5 .
[2] 邢淑君, 于玲, 陈鹤方, 孙柳, 梁嘉贵, 臧爽, 刘均娥. 肿瘤患者在新辅助免疫治疗临床试验中的角色感知及体验的质性研究[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(21): 6 -10 .
[3] 王瑞莹, 邢伟, 法宪恩, 陈钧卓. 孕妇妊娠晚期疲乏特征的潜在类别分析[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(21): 11 -16 .
[4] 黄玉楼, 周春兰, 刘宁, 李小贞, 刘敏利, 何银英, 孙宏春, 黄小娜, 龚秀群, 郑萍, 肖秀英. 轻度认知障碍老年人阶梯式营养管理方案的构建[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(21): 17 -22 .
[5] 郑西林, 陶子荣, 彭伶丽, 陈秀文. 护理信息平台构建的理论依据及类别应用进展[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(21): 23 -26 .
[6] 邬宇涵, 苏茜, 貟蓓, 陈恋, 潘潇, 韩琳. 心理测评系统在人才测评中应用进展及启示[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(21): 27 -31 .
[7] 林杨, 张勤娥, 张莉莉, 张文博, 徐宁. 护理人员参与共享决策实践认知和体验质性研究的Meta整合[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(21): 32 -37 .
[8] 陈华, 孙兴兰, 肖丹, 涂惠, 刘佳文, 徐文君, 宋玉洁, 熊晓云. 心力衰竭患者易损期容量管理的最佳证据总结[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(21): 38 -42 .
[9] 汤青云, 黄夏赟, 李燕云, 谢红燕, 李冰. 286例青年男男性行为HIV/AIDS患者恐惧疾病进展现状及影响因素分析[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(21): 43 -48 .
[10] 陈雪红, 黄敏娟, 谭瑜, 张靖瑜, 陈韵澄. 918名高职护生职业成熟度现状及影响因素分析[J]. 护理学报, 2022, 29(21): 49 -54 .