Ohrbach Richard, Turner Judith A, Sherman Jeffrey J, Mancl Lloyd A, Truelove Edmond L, Schiffman Eric L, Dworkin Samuel F
Department of Oral Diagnostic Sciences, University of Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA.
J Orofac Pain. 2010 Winter;24(1):48-62.
To evaluate the psychometric properties of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) biobehavioral (Axis II) screening instruments.
Participants with Axis I TMD diagnoses (n = 626) completed the Axis II instruments (Depression, Nonspecific Physical Symptoms, Graded Chronic Pain) and other instruments assessing psychological distress, pain, and disability at three study sites. Internal consistency, temporal stability, and convergent/discriminant validity of the Axis II measures were assessed. To assess criterion validity of Nonspecific Physical Symptoms and Depression instruments as screeners, 170 participants completed a structured psychiatric diagnostic interview.
The Axis II instruments showed very good to excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha coefficients = 0.80 to 0.95). Their convergent (correlation range 0.3 to 0.9) and discriminant (range 0.0 to 0.6) validity were generally supported, although Nonspecific Physical Symptoms was more strongly associated with depressive than with somatic symptoms. Temporal stability was high for characteristic pain intensity (Lin's correlation concordance coefficient [CCC] = 0.91), interference (CCC = 0.89), and chronic pain grade (weighted kappa = 0.87), and fair to good for Depression and Nonspecific Physical Symptoms (CCC = 0.63 to 0.78). The Depression instrument normal versus moderate to severe cutoff point was good at identifying current-year depression and dysthymia diagnoses (sensitivity 87%, specificity 53%). Nonspecific Physical Symptoms did not have high utility for detecting psychiatric disorders (sensitivity 86%, specificity 31%).
The Axis-II Depression and Graded Chronic Pain instruments have clinically relevant and acceptable psychometric properties for reliability and validity and utility as instruments for identifying TMD patients with high levels of distress, pain, and disability that can interfere with treatment response and course of Axis I disorders.
评估颞下颌关节紊乱病研究诊断标准(RDC/TMD)生物行为学(轴II)筛查工具的心理测量学特性。
患有轴I型颞下颌关节紊乱病诊断的参与者(n = 626)在三个研究地点完成了轴II工具(抑郁、非特异性身体症状、分级慢性疼痛)以及其他评估心理困扰、疼痛和残疾的工具。评估了轴II测量的内部一致性、时间稳定性以及收敛/区分效度。为了评估非特异性身体症状和抑郁工具作为筛查工具的标准效度,170名参与者完成了结构化的精神科诊断访谈。
轴II工具显示出非常好到极好的内部一致性(克朗巴哈α系数 = 0.80至0.95)。它们的收敛效度(相关范围为0.3至0.9)和区分效度(范围为0.0至0.6)总体上得到支持,尽管非特异性身体症状与抑郁症状的关联比与躯体症状的关联更强。特征性疼痛强度(林氏相关一致性系数[CCC] = 0.91)、干扰(CCC = 0.89)和慢性疼痛分级(加权kappa = 0.87)的时间稳定性较高,抑郁和非特异性身体症状的时间稳定性为中等至良好(CCC = 0.63至0.78)。抑郁工具正常与中度至重度的分界点在识别当年的抑郁和心境恶劣诊断方面表现良好(敏感性87%,特异性53%)。非特异性身体症状在检测精神障碍方面效用不高(敏感性86%,特异性31%)。
轴II抑郁和分级慢性疼痛工具在可靠性、效度和效用方面具有临床相关且可接受的心理测量学特性,可作为识别患有高水平困扰、疼痛和残疾的颞下颌关节紊乱病患者的工具,这些因素会干扰轴I型疾病的治疗反应和病程。