Dorman Saskie, Byrne Anthony, Edwards Adrian
Forest Holme, Poole Hospital NHS Trust, 5 Seldown Road, Poole, Dorset, UK.
Palliat Med. 2007 Apr;21(3):177-91. doi: 10.1177/0269216307076398. Epub 2007 Mar 15.
INTRODUCTION: There is no universally accepted measurement scale to assess breathlessness in adult palliative care patients. This significantly hampers clinical practice and research into effective interventions. The aim is to systematically identify and appraise breathlessness measurement scales, which are validated for use in palliative care or which show potential for use. METHODS: We undertook systematic searches of electronic databases (Cochrane databases 2005, MEDLINE 1966-2005, OLDMEDLINE 1950-1965, EMBASE 1980-2005, PsycINFO 1872-2005, AMED 1985-2005, CINAHL 1982-2005, SIGLE 1980-2005) with follow-up searches (reference lists of included papers, hand-searches of relevant journals). The basic search strategy was 'breathlessness (etc.) AND measurement (scales, validation etc.) AND palliative care/cardiac failure/respiratory disease/ neoplasm etc.', modified for each database, without language restriction. Patient-based scales with evaluations of at least two psychometric characteristics were included. Exercise-based tests were excluded. Scales were appraised with particular emphasis on construct validity and responsiveness. RESULTS: We identified 29 scales: six to measure breathlessness severity, four to assess breathlessness descriptions, and 19 to measure functional impact of breathlessness. SEVERITY: The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) and modified Borg Scale have been evaluated in COPD (the NRS has also been evaluated in cancer). Both require further assessment of responsiveness and test-retest reliability over time intervals relevant to palliative care. Visual Analogue Scales have also been evaluated, but require larger sample sizes than NRS for evidence of intervention effectiveness. DESCRIPTIONS: The Japanese Cancer Dyspnoea Scale (CDS) has been evaluated in patients with cancer, but requires further assessment of construct validity and responsiveness. FUNCTIONAL IMPACT: The Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire dyspnoea subscale (CRQ-D) has been evaluated in chronic lung diseases and heart failure; the MND Respiratory Scale is similar. CRQ-D has face and construct validity, test-retest reliability and responsiveness, and shows promise for palliative care. CONCLUSION: The NRS, modified Borg, CRQ-D and CDS appear most suitable for use in palliative care, but further evaluation is required before adopting any scale as standard. This review has been registered with the Cochrane collaboration and will be published and updated as a Cochrane review.
引言:目前尚无普遍接受的测量量表来评估成人姑息治疗患者的呼吸困难。这严重阻碍了临床实践以及对有效干预措施的研究。目的是系统地识别和评估已在姑息治疗中得到验证或显示出应用潜力的呼吸困难测量量表。 方法:我们对电子数据库(2005年Cochrane数据库、1966 - 2005年MEDLINE、1950 - 1965年OLDMEDLINE、1980 - 2005年EMBASE、1872 - 2005年PsycINFO、1985 - 2005年AMED、1982 - 2005年CINAHL、1980 - 2005年SIGLE)进行了系统检索,并进行了后续检索(纳入论文的参考文献列表、对相关期刊的手工检索)。基本检索策略为“呼吸困难(等) AND 测量(量表、验证等) AND 姑息治疗/心力衰竭/呼吸系统疾病/肿瘤等”,针对每个数据库进行修改,无语言限制。纳入至少对两个心理测量学特征进行评估的基于患者的量表。排除基于运动的测试。对量表的评估特别强调结构效度和反应性。 结果:我们识别出29个量表:6个用于测量呼吸困难严重程度,4个用于评估呼吸困难描述,19个用于测量呼吸困难的功能影响。 严重程度:数字评定量表(NRS)和改良的博格量表已在慢性阻塞性肺疾病中进行了评估(NRS也在癌症中进行了评估)。两者都需要在与姑息治疗相关的时间间隔内进一步评估反应性和重测信度。视觉模拟量表也已进行评估,但与NRS相比,需要更大的样本量才能获得干预效果的证据。 描述:日本癌症呼吸困难量表(CDS)已在癌症患者中进行了评估,但需要进一步评估结构效度和反应性。功能影响:慢性呼吸问卷呼吸困难子量表(CRQ - D)已在慢性肺部疾病和心力衰竭中进行了评估;运动神经元病呼吸量表与之类似。CRQ - D具有表面效度和结构效度、重测信度和反应性,在姑息治疗中显示出应用前景。 结论:NRS、改良的博格量表、CRQ - D和CDS似乎最适合用于姑息治疗,但在将任何量表作为标准采用之前,还需要进一步评估。本综述已在Cochrane协作网注册,并将作为Cochrane综述发表和更新。
Health Technol Assess. 2001
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-1-6
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-5-20
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018-4-18
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021-8-23
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021-7-20
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018-2-6
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018-1-3
Cureus. 2023-8-17
Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2022
Eur Clin Respir J. 2021-3-30
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2020-4-3