Varma Madhulika G, Wang Jennifer Y, Berian Julia R, Patterson Taryn R, McCrea G Lindsay, Hart Stacey L
Department of Surgery, University of California San Francisco, 2330 Post Street, Suite 260, San Francisco, California 94115, USA.
Dis Colon Rectum. 2008 Feb;51(2):162-72. doi: 10.1007/s10350-007-9140-0. Epub 2008 Jan 3.
This study was designed to develop and test the validity and reliability of the Constipation Severity Instrument.
Scale development was conducted in two stages: 1) 74 items were generated through a literature review and focus groups of constipated patients and medical providers; and 2) a preliminary instrument was administered to 191 constipated patients and 103 healthy volunteers. Test-retest reliability of the constipated group was assessed (N=90). Content, convergent, divergent, and discriminant validity were evaluated by using other validated measures by performing one-way analysis of variance and Pearson correlations.
Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis revealed three subscales: obstructive defecation, colonic inertia, and pain. Internal consistency (alpha=0.88-0.91) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients=0.84-0.91) were high for all subscales. Constipated patients were grouped by Rome II criteria: functional constipation (22 percent), pelvic floor dyssynergia (15 percent), constipation predominant irritable bowel syndrome (23 percent), and no specific criteria (40 percent). Those with constipation predominant irritable bowel syndrome or pelvic floor dyssynergia scored higher on the Obstructive Defecation and Colonic Inertia subscales than those with functional constipation or no specific criteria (P=0.001-0.058). Subjects with functional constipation had much lower scores on the pain subscale than constipation predominant irritable bowel syndrome, functional constipation, or no specific criteria (P<0.009). The Constipation Severity Instrument subscale and total score correlated very highly with the subscales and total score of the Patient Assessment of Constipation Symptom measure. The Constipation Severity Instrument subscales discriminated well between constipated patients and healthy volunteers (P<0.001) and demonstrated excellent divergent validity. Higher Constipation Severity Instrument scores inversely correlated with general quality of life.
The Constipation Severity Instrument is a reliable and valid instrument for assessing constipated patients. Administration of the Constipation Severity Instrument to other constipated patients will further validate its use.
本研究旨在开发并测试便秘严重程度量表的有效性和可靠性。
量表开发分两个阶段进行:1)通过文献综述以及便秘患者和医疗服务提供者的焦点小组生成74个条目;2)对191名便秘患者和103名健康志愿者施测初步量表。评估便秘组的重测信度(N = 90)。通过单向方差分析和Pearson相关性分析,使用其他经过验证的测量方法评估内容效度、收敛效度、发散效度和区分效度。
探索性和验证性因素分析揭示了三个子量表:排便梗阻、结肠惰性和疼痛。所有子量表的内部一致性(α = 0.88 - 0.91)和重测信度(组内相关系数 = 0.84 - 0.91)都很高。便秘患者根据罗马II标准分组:功能性便秘(22%)、盆底失协调(15%)、便秘型肠易激综合征(23%)和无特定标准(40%)。便秘型肠易激综合征或盆底失协调患者在排便梗阻和结肠惰性子量表上的得分高于功能性便秘或无特定标准的患者(P = 0.001 - 0.058)。功能性便秘患者在疼痛子量表上的得分远低于便秘型肠易激综合征、功能性便秘或无特定标准的患者(P < 0.009)。便秘严重程度量表子量表和总分与便秘症状患者评估量表的子量表和总分高度相关。便秘严重程度量表子量表在便秘患者和健康志愿者之间有很好的区分度(P < 0.001),并显示出良好的发散效度。便秘严重程度量表得分越高与总体生活质量呈负相关。
便秘严重程度量表是评估便秘患者的可靠且有效的工具。将便秘严重程度量表应用于其他便秘患者将进一步验证其用途。