Perreault Nathalie, Brisson Chantal, Dionne Clermont E, Montreuil Sylvie, Punnett Laura
Quebec Rehabilitation Institute, 525 Hamel Est, Quebec City, Canada.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2008 Mar 17;9:34. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-9-34.
In epidemiological studies on neck-shoulder disorders, physical examination by health professionals, although more expensive, is usually considered a better method of data collection than self-administered questionnaires on symptoms. However, little is known on the comparison of these two methods of data collection. The agreement between self-administered questionnaires and the physical examination on the presence of neck-shoulders disorders was assessed in the present study.
This study was conducted among clerical workers using video display units. Prevalent cases were workers for whom neck-shoulder symptoms were present for at least 3 days during the previous 7 days and for whom pain intensity was greater than 50 mm on a 100 mm visual analogue scale. All 85 workers meeting this definition and a random sample of 102 workers who did not meet this definition were selected. Physical examination included measures of active range of motion and musculoskeletal strength. Cohen's kappa and global percent agreement were calculated to compare the two methods of data collection. The effect on the agreement of different question and physical examination definitions and the importance of the time interval elapsed between the administrations of the tests were also evaluated.
Kappa coefficients ranged from 0.19 to 0.54 depending on the definitions used to ascertain disorders. The agreement was highest when the two instruments were administered 21 days apart or less (Kappa = 0.54, global agreement = 77%). It was not substantially improved by the addition of criteria related to functional limitations or when comparisons were made with alternative physical examination definitions. Pain intensity recorded during physical examination maneuvers was an important element of the agreement between questionnaire and physical examination findings.
These results suggest a fair to good agreement between the presence of musculoskeletal disorders ascertained by self-administered questionnaire and physical examination that may reflect differences in the constructs measured. Shorter time lags result in better agreement. Investigators should consider these results before choosing a method to measure the presence of musculoskeletal disorders in the neck-shoulder region.
在关于颈肩疾病的流行病学研究中,由健康专业人员进行体格检查,尽管成本更高,但通常被认为是比自我填写症状问卷更好的数据收集方法。然而,对于这两种数据收集方法的比较了解甚少。本研究评估了自我填写问卷与体格检查在颈肩疾病存在情况方面的一致性。
本研究在使用视频显示终端的文职人员中进行。现患病例为在前7天内颈肩症状至少持续3天且在100毫米视觉模拟量表上疼痛强度大于50毫米的工人。选取了所有符合该定义的85名工人以及102名不符合该定义的工人的随机样本。体格检查包括主动活动范围和肌肉骨骼力量的测量。计算科恩kappa系数和总体百分比一致性以比较两种数据收集方法。还评估了不同问题和体格检查定义对一致性的影响以及两次检查之间时间间隔的重要性。
根据用于确定疾病的定义,kappa系数范围为0.19至0.54。当两种检查相隔21天或更短时间进行时,一致性最高(kappa = 0.54,总体一致性 = 77%)。增加与功能受限相关的标准或与替代体格检查定义进行比较时,一致性并未显著提高。体格检查操作期间记录的疼痛强度是问卷和体格检查结果之间一致性的重要因素。
这些结果表明,通过自我填写问卷和体格检查确定的肌肉骨骼疾病存在情况之间存在中等至良好的一致性,这可能反映了所测量结构的差异。较短的时间间隔会导致更好的一致性。研究人员在选择测量颈肩区域肌肉骨骼疾病存在情况的方法之前应考虑这些结果。