Garcia Mark J, Matson Johnny L
Pinecrest Developmental Center, Pineville, USA.
J Intellect Dev Disabil. 2008 Jun;33(2):171-6. doi: 10.1080/13668250802065190.
This study assessed the psychometrics of two measures--the Matson Evaluation of Drug Side-effects (MEDS) and the Akathisia Ratings of Movement Scale (ARMS)--and examined the symptom profile of akathisia in a sample of people with intellectual disability (ID).
Sixty-six participants formed three groups of 22 individuals, matched on age, race, sex, and level of ID. The sample comprised Group 1: individuals with no antipsychotic drug use and no diagnosis of akathisia (control group); Group 2: individuals taking antipsychotics and with no diagnosis of akathisia (no akathisia group); and Group 3: individuals taking antipsychotics and with a diagnosis of akathisia (akathisia group).
Both measures indicated the presence of akathisia in those individuals with a diagnosis of akathisia, while the two groups without a diagnosis of akathisia did not qualify for a diagnosis of akathisia on either scale. Interestingly, item analysis of the MEDS and ARMS tended to identify different symptoms of akathisia and were moderately correlated.
The data appear to suggest that both measures have merit, that they are complementary, and that they should be used together when assessing akathisia in individuals with ID.
本研究评估了两种测量方法——马特森药物副作用评估量表（MEDS）和静坐不能运动评定量表（ARMS）的心理测量学特性，并在智力残疾（ID）患者样本中研究了静坐不能的症状特征。
66名参与者分为三组，每组22人，在年龄、种族、性别和ID水平上进行匹配。样本包括：第1组：未使用抗精神病药物且未诊断为静坐不能的个体（对照组）；第2组：服用抗精神病药物且未诊断为静坐不能的个体（无静坐不能组）；第3组：服用抗精神病药物且诊断为静坐不能的个体（静坐不能组）。
两种测量方法均表明，诊断为静坐不能的个体存在静坐不能，而未诊断为静坐不能的两组在任何一个量表上均不符合静坐不能的诊断标准。有趣的是，对MEDS和ARMS的项目分析倾向于识别静坐不能的不同症状，且两者呈中度相关。
数据似乎表明，这两种测量方法都有价值，它们是互补的，在评估ID个体的静坐不能时应一起使用。
