Hulsebos R G, Beltman F W, dos Reis Miranda D, Spangenberg J F
University Hospital Groningen, The Netherlands.
Intensive Care Med. 1991;17(5):285-8. doi: 10.1007/BF01713939.
A pilot-study was done to investigate the applicability of the sickness impact profile (SIP) in ex-ICU patients. For this study 221 consecutively admitted patients were reviewed retrospectively after excluding children, deceased patients and readmissions. SIP was assessed in these patients by either interview or questionnaire. These were divided into three groups: i) Patients interviewed at home (n = 26). ii) Patients receiving the SIP-questionnaire by mail (n = 93). iii) As for group ii, but after receiving a telephone invitation to participate (n = 102). Highest mean SIP-score was found in group i (16.3). Groups ii and iii scored 10.2 and 7.9 respectively. Analysis of variance demonstrated overall SIP-scores of these groups to be significantly different. The response in group iii (77%) was significantly higher compared to group ii (56%). Data collection in Group i appeared to be most expensive costing $13.20 per patient, followed by group iii ($3.79) and group ii ($2.56). It is concluded that the self-administered SIP is suitable for measuring outcome in ICU-patients and is much cheaper than the direct interview technique. The 3 different approaches should be considered as independent methods of which individual results cannot be compared. The response can be improved significantly by calling the patients before sending the questionnaire.
开展了一项初步研究,以调查疾病影响量表(SIP)在重症监护病房(ICU)转出患者中的适用性。在本研究中,对221例连续入院患者进行回顾性分析,排除了儿童、死亡患者和再入院患者。通过访谈或问卷调查对这些患者进行SIP评估。这些患者分为三组:i)在家接受访谈的患者(n = 26)。ii)通过邮件收到SIP问卷的患者(n = 93)。iii)与ii组相同,但在收到电话邀请后参与的患者(n = 102)。i组的平均SIP得分最高(16.3)。ii组和iii组的得分分别为10.2和7.9。方差分析表明,这些组的总体SIP得分存在显著差异。iii组的回复率(77%)显著高于ii组(56%)。i组的数据收集似乎成本最高,每位患者花费13.20美元,其次是iii组(3.79美元)和ii组(2.56美元)。结论是,自我管理的SIP适用于测量ICU患者的预后,并且比直接访谈技术便宜得多。这三种不同的方法应被视为独立的方法,其个体结果无法进行比较。在发送问卷之前给患者打电话可以显著提高回复率。