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)

104

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] 张玺, 黄静, 汪天华, 李燕, 曹沅, 李明惠, 余立平. 发育障碍儿童养育心理韧性量表的汉化及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2025, 32(4): 6-11.
[2] 丁心舒, 孙乐菲, 高伟, 鲁琦, 闫畅, 刘德山. 矛盾年龄歧视量表在社区老年人中的信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(7): 12-16.
[3] 袁华君, 段功香, 陈路桥, 王慧清. 癌症终末期患者救护意愿量表的编制及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(6): 73-78.
[4] 谭如意, 龙秀红, 马红利, 陈兰. 腰椎间盘突出症患者中医康复健康信息获取行为量表的编制及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(5): 67-72.
[5] 张钰琳, 朱向伟, 洪慧芳, 卢根娣. 重大传染病突发事件中护士伦理困境量表的研制及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(4): 1-6.
[6] 宋彩妮, 郑尧, 宋英, 刘丽华. 癌症照顾者信息隐瞒量表的汉化及在肺癌患者照顾者中的信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(3): 17-20.
[7] 张国春, 李海云, 褚梁梁, 程雪, 王君芝. 产科护士围产期姑息照护知信行量表的编制及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(2): 6-11.
[8] 罗铎麟, 杨春清, 高萍, 胡清文, 徐小群. 2型糖尿病心理痛苦量表的汉化及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(19): 24-30.
[9] 简称苹, 张汉卿, 王丽英, 田海艳, 彭向东, 张亚楠, 蔡德芳. 本科护生自我调节学习策略量表的汉化及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(18): 12-15.
[10] 王晓宁, 缪群芳, 李培清, 辛思莹, 黄姚姚. 自杀公众污名量表的汉化及在中国公众人群中的信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(17): 1-7.
[11] 朱亚晋, 王朝辉, 代明珠, 王琳, 孙莹莹. 临床护士文化能力量表的汉化及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(17): 46-50.
[12] 张玉霞, 樊晓辉, 王雪皎, 刘雨安, 李乐之. 正念自我照护量表的汉化及其在ICU护士中的信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(15): 46-51.
[13] 陶伏莹, 蒋佳男, 付东英, 田莹莹. 基于保护动机理论手术室护士外科手术烟雾防护意愿量表的编制及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(15): 73-78.
[14] 杨晨, 宋慧娟, 覃承诃, 杨静华, 龚雪, 黄文嫣. 骨搬运患者出院准备度评估量表的编制及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(14): 1-5.
[15] 项倩妹, 唐惠艳, 王建新, 张慧慧, 刘欣雨, 李春辉. 儿科专科护士核心能力量表的编制及信效度检验[J]. 护理学报, 2024, 31(14): 74-78.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
No Suggested Reading articles found!