Dias J J, Rajan R A, Thompson J R
University Hospitals of Leicester, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK.
J Hand Surg Eur Vol. 2008 Feb;33(1):9-17. doi: 10.1177/1753193407087121.
The Patient Evaluation Measure (PEM), The Michigan Hand Outcome Questionnaire (MHQ) and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score were assessed independent of their originators for reliability, construct and criterion validity and acceptability, using an ease of use questionnaire. These were administered in random order to 100 patients with different hand and wrist disorders and with different impairments of movement, pain, sensation and strength. The internal consistency of all three questionnaires was very high suggesting redundancy in the questions. All questionnaires were reproducible and valid for finger and wrist disorders, but less for nerve disorders. All had poor construct validity. The PEM was the easiest to understand and complete, taking the least time. Correlation between the scales is high and conversion equations were calculated. All three are reliable and reproducible patient completed questionnaires, but the PEM is the easiest to use. The validity of all is suspected for nerve disorders.
使用一份易用性调查问卷，对患者评估量表（PEM）、密歇根手部结果问卷（MHQ）以及手臂、肩部和手部功能障碍（DASH）评分进行了评估，评估内容包括可靠性、结构效度、标准效度和可接受性，且评估与发起者无关。这些问卷以随机顺序发放给100名患有不同手部和腕部疾病、运动、疼痛、感觉和力量存在不同损伤的患者。所有三份问卷的内部一致性都非常高，表明问题存在冗余。所有问卷对于手指和腕部疾病都具有可重复性和有效性，但对于神经疾病的有效性较低。所有问卷的结构效度都较差。PEM最易于理解和填写，用时最少。各量表之间的相关性很高，并计算了转换方程。所有三份问卷都是可靠且可重复的患者自填问卷，但PEM最易于使用。对于神经疾病，所有问卷的效度都受到怀疑。
