Suppr超能文献

描述并验证了一个基于 ICHD-II 的意大利问卷,用于流行病学研究。

Description and validation of an Italian ICHD-II-based questionnaire for use in epidemiological research.

机构信息

Headache Centre, Department of Neuroscience, University of Parma, Parma, Italy.

出版信息

Headache. 2012 Sep;52(8):1262-82. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2011.02057.x. Epub 2011 Dec 28.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

In the absence of biological markers, the diagnosis of primary headache in epidemiological studies rests on clinical findings, as reported through ad-hoc interviews.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to validate a specially designed headache questionnaire to be administered by a physician for the diagnosis of primary headaches or of probable medication overuse headache in the general population according to the 2004 International Classification of Headache Disorders, 2nd edition (ICHD-II).

METHODS

The questionnaire comprises 76 questions based on the ICHD-II diagnostic criteria for migraine (codes 1.1, 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.5.1, and 1.6), tension-type headache (codes 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4), primary stabbing headache (code 4.1), and probable medication-overuse headache (code 8.2.7), as well as on other clinical features (eg, age at onset, relation between headache and pregnancy, etc). The answers to each question could be of the following types: (1) numbers (ie, age at onset); (2) "Yes" or "No" (eg, as in reply to "Do you have nausea during headache?"); and (3) predefined answers (eg, quality of pain). We assessed the validity and reliability of the questionnaire and its sensitivity and specificity for migraine and tension-type headache.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 50 patients (37 women and 13 men) aged 18-76 years (mean, 40.7) seen for the first time on a consecutive basis at the University of Parma Headache Centre. The questionnaire was administered independently by 2 trained physicians (E1 and E2) prior to the visit performed by a headache specialist taken as the gold standard (GS). GS, E1, and E2 were blind to the diagnosis made by each others. If appropriate, more than 1 headache type were considered. When present, we defined the 2 different headache types in the same subject as Diagnosis 1 and Diagnosis 2. Questionnaire-based diagnosis was compared with the diagnosis established by GS. For Diagnosis 1 (n = 50), we found an agreement rate of 98% (K-value: 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.88-1.00) between E1 and GS and between E2 and GS, and of 96% (K-value: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.80-1.00) between E1 and E2. For Diagnosis 2 (n = 24), we found an agreement rate of 83.3% (K-value: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.63-0.98) between E1 and GS, of 62.5% (K-value: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.41-0.82) between E2 and GS, and of 70.8% (K-value: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.45-0.87) between E1 and E2. Sensitivity and specificity were 100% and 93.3%, respectively, for migraine without aura (code 1.1) and 100% for frequent episodic tension-type headache (code 2.2).

CONCLUSION

Our findings support the use of this questionnaire as a valid and reliable tool for diagnosis of headaches in epidemiological studies.

摘要

背景

在缺乏生物学标志物的情况下,流行病学研究中的原发性头痛诊断依赖于临床发现,这些发现是通过专门的访谈报告的。

目的

本研究的目的是验证专门设计的头痛问卷,以便由医生根据 2004 年国际头痛疾病分类,第 2 版(ICHD-II),在普通人群中诊断原发性头痛或可能的药物过度使用性头痛。

方法

该问卷包含 76 个问题,基于 ICHD-II 偏头痛的诊断标准(代码 1.1、1.2.1、1.2.2、1.2.3、1.5.1 和 1.6)、紧张型头痛(代码 2.1、2.2、2.3 和 2.4)、原发性刺痛性头痛(代码 4.1)和可能的药物过度使用性头痛(代码 8.2.7),以及其他临床特征(例如,发病年龄、头痛与妊娠的关系等)。每个问题的答案可以是以下类型之一:(1)数字(即发病年龄);(2)“是”或“否”(例如,在回答“头痛时是否有恶心?”);(3)预定义的答案(例如,疼痛质量)。我们评估了问卷的有效性和可靠性,以及偏头痛和紧张型头痛的敏感性和特异性。

结果

研究人群包括 50 名患者(37 名女性和 13 名男性),年龄 18-76 岁(平均 40.7 岁),在帕玛大学头痛中心首次连续就诊。问卷由 2 名受过培训的医生(E1 和 E2)在头痛专家进行的就诊前独立进行,就诊作为金标准(GS)。GS、E1 和 E2 对彼此做出的诊断均不知情。如果合适,考虑了超过 1 种头痛类型。在同一患者中,如果存在两种不同的头痛类型,则将其定义为诊断 1 和诊断 2。基于问卷的诊断与由 GS 确定的诊断进行比较。对于诊断 1(n=50),我们发现 E1 与 GS 和 E2 与 GS 之间的一致性率为 98%(K 值:0.96;95%置信区间 [CI]:0.88-1.00),E1 与 E2 之间的一致性率为 96%(K 值:0.91;95% CI:0.80-1.00)。对于诊断 2(n=24),我们发现 E1 与 GS 之间的一致性率为 83.3%(K 值:0.80;95% CI:0.63-0.98),E2 与 GS 之间的一致性率为 62.5%(K 值:0.62;95% CI:0.41-0.82),E1 与 E2 之间的一致性率为 70.8%(K 值:0.66;95% CI:0.45-0.87)。偏头痛无先兆(代码 1.1)的敏感性和特异性分别为 100%和 93.3%,频发性发作性紧张型头痛(代码 2.2)的敏感性和特异性均为 100%。

结论

我们的研究结果支持使用该问卷作为诊断头痛的有效和可靠工具,可用于流行病学研究。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验