期刊文献+

鼻阻塞症状评估(NOSE)量表中文版的研制 被引量:32

Development of the Chinese nasal obstruction symptom evaluation (NOSE) questionnaire
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的研制鼻阻塞症状评估量表(NOSE)中文版。方法遵照国际规范程序引进量表,经正、逆向翻译,专家小组综合讨论,预试及初步考核满意后,选择鼻中隔偏曲患者223例和健康对照组80名进一步测试性能,接受临床检验,并与英文源量表及其他语言版本量表比较。采用SPSS19.0软件进行数据分析。结果中文版NOSE量表各项性能考核结果均达到或接近检验水准,与英文源量表性能相当。①可行性:试验组和对照组量表的接收率分别为97.6%和94.1%;平均完成时间分别为(1.5±0.5)、(1.0±0.5)min。②信度:克朗巴赫系数d=0.869,重测信度Spearman秩相关系数rs=0.996。③效度:量表得到专家认可;与医学结局研究短表-36(medicaloutcomesstudyshortform-36,SF.36)和视觉模拟量表(visualanaloguescale,VAS)的相关系数分别为-0.837和0.725;量表结构与源量表设计结构吻合。④反应度:术后3个月评分的标准化反应均数与效应量分别为1.34和1.21。⑤灵敏度:Mann—WhitneyU检验显示量表能有效区分试验组(秩均值117.81)和对照组(秩均值43.19)生存质量,差异有统计学意义(P值均〈0.01)。临床检验表明NOSE评分与鼻阻力参数具有相关性。结论中文版NOSE量表考核结果满意,可作为评估鼻阻塞症状的工具。 Objective To develop the Chinese version of the nasal obstruction symptom evaluation (NOSE) questionnaire. Methods After introduction, forward and backward translation, synthesis, expert committee review, pretest, adaptation and validation followed the international guidelines, the Chinese version of NOSE scale was tested among 223 nasal septal deviation patients and 80 health volunteers to further assess its psychometric and clinical properties. SPSS 19. 0 software was used to analyze the data. Results The Chinese version demonstrated satisfactory evaluation results. The acceptance rate of the questionnaire was 97.6% and 94. 1% in the patient group and control group respectively, and the completion time was ( 1. 5 ±0. 5 ) min and ( 1. 0± 0. 5 ) rain. Internal consistency reliability ( Cronbach ' s ot ) was calculated to be 0. 869. Test-retest reliability coefficient was adequate at r, = 0. 996. Content validity was approved by our expert committee. Criteria validity (Spearman correlation coefficient ) between NOSE Chinese version and SF-36, as well as VAS was -0. 837 and 0. 725 separately. Construct validity of Chinese version was similar to that of the original edition. The standardized response mean and the effect size at three months postoperatively was respectively 1.34 and 1.21, indicating high responsiveness. Calculated by Mann-Whitney U test, the instrument showed excellent sensitivity to discriminate the subjects with or without nasal obstruction ( P 〈 0. 01 ). The NOSE scores were also correlated with nasal resistance by rhinomanometry. Conclusions The NOSE Chinese version was successfully cross-cultural adapted and validated. It therefore can be recommended as a robust tool for future measuring subjective severity of nasal obstruction in China.
出处 《中华耳鼻咽喉头颈外科杂志》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2014年第1期20-26,共7页 Chinese Journal of Otorhinolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery
基金 河南省科技攻关重点项目(112102310160)
关键词 鼻塞 生活质量 气道阻力 疾病严重程度指数 Nasal obstruction Quality of life Airway resistance Severity of illness index
  • 相关文献

参考文献29

  • 1吕威,亓放,高志强,冯国栋,袁先道,金晓峰.汉化版SNOT-22评价慢性鼻-鼻窦炎患者生存质量的初步研究[J].中华耳鼻咽喉头颈外科杂志,2008,43(1):18-21. 被引量:44
  • 2André RF,Vuyk HD,Ahmed A. Correlation between subjective and objective evaluation of the nasal airway.A systematic review of the highest level of evidence[J].Clinical Otolaryngology,2009,(06):518-525.
  • 3Stewart MG,Witsell DL,Smith TL. Development and validation of the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) scale[J].Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery,2004,(02):157-163.
  • 4Beaton DE,Bombardier C,Guillemin F. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures[J].Spine (Philo Pa 1976),2000,(24):3186-3191.
  • 5慢性鼻-鼻窦炎诊断和治疗指南(2008年,南昌)[J].中华耳鼻咽喉头颈外科杂志,2009,44(1):6-7. 被引量:575
  • 6Mozzanica F,Urbani E,Atac M. Reliability and validity of the Italian nose obstruction symptom evaluation (I-NOSE) scale[J].European Archives of Oto-rhino-laryngology,2013,(12):3087-3094.
  • 7Bezerra TF,Padua FG,Pilan RR. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of a quality of life questionnaire:the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation questionnaire[J].Rhinology,2011,(02):227-231.
  • 8Marro M,Mondina M,Stoll D. French validation of the NOSE and RhinoQOL questionnaires in the management of nasal obstruction[J].Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery,2011,(06):988-993.
  • 9Morley AD,Sharp HR. A review of sinonasal outcome scoring systems-which is best[J].Clinical Otolaryngology,2006,(02):103-109.
  • 10刘加林,梁传余,康德英,王力红,刘世喜.《中华耳鼻咽喉科杂志》论文中生存质量评价存在的问题[J].中华耳鼻咽喉头颈外科杂志,2005,40(11):874-876. 被引量:6

二级参考文献43

共引文献817

同被引文献195

引证文献32

二级引证文献104

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部