Stucki A, Borchers M, Stucki G, Cieza A, Amann E, Ruof J
Department of Internal Medicine, University Hospital Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Int J Obes (Lond). 2006 Dec;30(12):1791-9. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijo.0803335. Epub 2006 Apr 4.
To compare the content covered by twelve obesity-specific health status measures using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF).
Obesity-specific health status measures were identified and then linked to the ICF separately by two trained health professionals according to standardized guidelines. The degree of agreement between health professionals was calculated by means of the kappa (kappa) statistic. Bootstrapped confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. The obesity-specific health-status measures were compared on the component and category level of the ICF.
welve condition-specific health-status measures were identified and included in this study, namely the obesity-related problem scale, the obesity eating problems scale, the obesity-related coping and obesity-related distress questionnaire, the impact of weight on quality of life questionnaire (short version), the health-related quality of life questionnaire, the obesity adjustment survey (short form), the short specific quality of life scale, the obesity-related well-being questionnaire, the bariatric analysis and reporting outcome system, the bariatric quality of life index, the obesity and weight loss quality of life questionnaire and the weight-related symptom measure.
In the 280 items of the eight measures, a total of 413 concepts were identified and linked to the 87 different ICF categories. The measures varied strongly in the number of concepts contained and the number of ICF categories used to map these concepts. Items on body functions varied form 12% in the obesity-related problem scale to 95% in the weight-related symptom measure. The estimated kappa coefficients ranged between 0.79 (CI: 0.72, 0.86) at the component ICFs level and 0.97 (CI: 0.93, 1.0) at the third ICF's level.
The ICF proved highly useful for the content comparison of obesity-specific health-status measures. The results may provide clinicians and researchers with new insights when selecting health-status measures for clinical studies in obesity.
使用国际功能、残疾与健康分类(ICF)比较12项肥胖特异性健康状况测量指标所涵盖的内容。
确定肥胖特异性健康状况测量指标,然后由两名经过培训的健康专业人员根据标准化指南分别将其与ICF进行关联。通过kappa(κ)统计量计算健康专业人员之间的一致性程度。计算自抽样置信区间(CI)。在ICF的组件和类别层面比较肥胖特异性健康状况测量指标。
确定12项特定疾病健康状况测量指标并纳入本研究,即肥胖相关问题量表、肥胖饮食问题量表、肥胖相关应对和肥胖相关困扰问卷、体重对生活质量问卷(简版)、健康相关生活质量问卷、肥胖调整调查(简表)、简短特定生活质量量表、肥胖相关幸福感问卷、减重分析与报告结果系统、减重生活质量指数、肥胖与体重减轻生活质量问卷以及体重相关症状测量。
在八项测量指标的280个条目中,共确定了413个概念并将其与87个不同的ICF类别相关联。这些测量指标在所含概念数量以及用于映射这些概念的ICF类别数量方面差异很大。身体功能方面的条目在肥胖相关问题量表中占12%,在体重相关症状测量中占95%。估计的kappa系数在ICF组件层面为0.79(CI:0.72,0.86),在ICF第三个层面为0.97(CI:0.93,1.0)。
ICF被证明对肥胖特异性健康状况测量指标的内容比较非常有用。这些结果可能为临床医生和研究人员在选择肥胖临床研究的健康状况测量指标时提供新的见解。