Suppr超能文献

偏头痛-ACT问卷的信度、效度及临床实用性

Reliability, validity, and clinical utility of the Migraine-ACT questionnaire.

作者信息

Kilminster Shaun G, Dowson Andrew J, Tepper Stewart J, Baos Vicente, Baudet Francis, D'Amico Domenico

机构信息

Institute of Naval Medicine, Alverstoke, Hampshire, UK.

出版信息

Headache. 2006 Apr;46(4):553-62. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2006.00403.x.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The 4-item Migraine-ACT questionnaire is an assessment tool for use by primary care physicians to identify patients who require a change in their current acute migraine treatment. It has been shown to be easy to use, and to be reliable and accurate in its assessments.

OBJECTIVES

To further analyze the Migraine-ACT study database, providing additional information on the reliability, validity, and potential clinical utility of the questionnaire.

METHODS

Reliability was assessed by recording the distribution of Migraine-ACT scores recorded at baseline and 1 week later (test-retest reliability). Analyses of consistency of Migraine-ACT scores were conducted on the total sample of patients and for the separate centers, using Pearson and Spearman correlations. Validity was assessed by comparing the t-discrimination values for clinically relevant questions within domains of the original 27-item questionnaire. Reliability and validity were also assessed by constructing an "alternative" (Form B) Migraine-ACT questionnaire, derived from an analysis of the second-best items in each domain in the original study data. Clinical utility was assessed using Pearson pairwise correlations to compare Migraine-ACT scores with clinically defined criteria as analyzed by the SF-36 Quality of Life questionnaire, the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire, and the Migraine Therapy Assessment (MTAQ) questionnaire.

RESULTS

The distribution of Migraine-ACT scores between the 2 completions of the questionnaire was consistent for the total sample (test-retest reliability, r= .81) and between the individual countries (r= .61 to .92). In this study, the validity (assessed as t-discrimination) of the Migraine-ACT "impact" and "global assessment of relief" questions were markedly higher than those of other endpoints used in migraine clinical studies. The Form B Migraine-ACT questionnaire was almost as reliable and accurate as the original Form A questionnaire. The distribution of Migraine-ACT scores was: 0 = 12.6%, 1 = 13.7%, 2 = 14.7%, 3 = 20.5%, and 4 = 38.4%. The change in Migraine-ACT score correlated with, and had a linear relationship with changes in SF-36, MIDAS, and MTAQ scores, and indicated that a Migraine-ACT score of <or=2 corresponded with a need to consider changing the patient's acute medication. About 40% of the migraine patients in the study scored <or=2 and may have had significant unmet treatment needs.

CONCLUSIONS

These data confirm the excellent reliability and validity of the Migraine-ACT questionnaire and provide further evidence for its utility in clinical practice.

摘要

背景

4项偏头痛-急性治疗(Migraine-ACT)问卷是一种供初级保健医生使用的评估工具,用于识别需要改变当前急性偏头痛治疗方案的患者。已证明该问卷易于使用,且评估可靠、准确。

目的

进一步分析偏头痛-急性治疗研究数据库,提供有关该问卷的可靠性、有效性及潜在临床实用性的更多信息。

方法

通过记录基线时和1周后记录的偏头痛-急性治疗得分分布来评估可靠性(重测信度)。使用Pearson和Spearman相关性分析对患者总样本以及各个中心的偏头痛-急性治疗得分一致性进行分析。通过比较原始27项问卷各领域内临床相关问题的t鉴别值来评估有效性。还通过构建一份“替代”(B版)偏头痛-急性治疗问卷来评估可靠性和有效性,该问卷源自对原始研究数据中各领域次优项目的分析。使用Pearson成对相关性比较偏头痛-急性治疗得分与由SF-36生活质量问卷、偏头痛残疾评估(MIDAS)问卷和偏头痛治疗评估(MTAQ)问卷分析得出的临床定义标准,以此评估临床实用性。

结果

问卷两次填写之间偏头痛-急性治疗得分的分布在总样本中是一致的(重测信度,r = 0.81),在各个国家之间也是一致的(r = 0.61至0.92)。在本研究中,偏头痛-急性治疗“影响”和“缓解总体评估”问题的有效性(以t鉴别评估)明显高于偏头痛临床研究中使用的其他终点指标。B版偏头痛-急性治疗问卷几乎与原始A版问卷一样可靠和准确。偏头痛-急性治疗得分的分布为:0 = 12.6%,1 = 13.7%,2 = 14.7%,3 = 20.5%,4 = 38.4%。偏头痛-急性治疗得分的变化与SF-36、MIDAS和MTAQ得分的变化相关且呈线性关系,表明偏头痛-急性治疗得分≤2对应于需要考虑改变患者的急性药物治疗。该研究中约40%的偏头痛患者得分≤2,可能存在显著未满足的治疗需求。

结论

这些数据证实了偏头痛-急性治疗问卷具有出色的可靠性和有效性,并为其在临床实践中的实用性提供了进一步证据。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验