Suppr超能文献

慢性心力衰竭三种主观结局指标报告的反应性

Responsiveness of three subjective report of outcome measures for chronic heart failure.

作者信息

Zhu Yan-bo, Origasa Hideki, Luo Xiao-xia, Wang Yang-yang, Di Jie, Lin Lin

机构信息

School of Administration, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing 100029, China.

出版信息

Zhong Xi Yi Jie He Xue Bao. 2012 Dec;10(12):1375-81. doi: 10.3736/jcim20121207.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the responsiveness of a newly designed symptom scale, the Chinese Medical Symptom Rating Scale for Heart Failure (CMSRS-HF), with the Chinese version of Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) and the Medical Outcomes Study Short-form 36 (SF-36), and provide basis for the selection of subjective outcome measures for clinical evaluation of treatment of chronic heart failure by integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine.

METHODS

One hundred and fifty-six patients with chronic heart failure were recruited from three clinical centers and were treated with Chinese herbal medicine based on syndrome classification. The patients were classified with standard of New York Heart Association and evaluated with CMSRS-HF, MLHFQ and SF-36. Three techniques for the quantification of responsiveness were utilized: paired t-test, effect sizes (ES) and standardized response means (SRM).

RESULTS

a) After 2-week treatment, patients scored significantly lower in CMSRS-HF, while scores of each dimension on MLHFQ and SF-36 increased significantly (P=0.000). b) ES of CMSRS-HF was greater than 0.8. ES of physical and emotional dimensions and comprehensive scores of MLHFQ were between 0.37 and 0.61; ES of each dimension, physical and emotional domains, and comprehensive scores were between 0.14 and 0.49. c) SRM of CMSRS-HF was greater than 0.8; SRM of physical and emotional dimensions and comprehensive scores of MLHFQ ranged from 0.53 to 0.92; SRM of each dimension, physical and emotional domains, and comprehensive scores were between 0.23 and 0.83. d) By stratified analysis according to NYHA classification, the acute patients (NYHA III, IV) were more sensitive to subjective outcome measures.

CONCLUSION

Responsiveness of the newly designed CMSRS-HF is high. However, responsiveness of MLHFQ and most dimensions in SF-36 is moderate. When evaluating clinical effects of integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine on chronic heart failure, different scales can be applied according to actual clinical presentations.

摘要

目的

比较新设计的症状量表——中国心力衰竭中医症状评定量表(CMSRS-HF)与中文版明尼苏达心力衰竭生活质量问卷(MLHFQ)及医学结局研究简明健康调查量表(SF-36)的反应度,为中西医结合治疗慢性心力衰竭临床疗效评估中主观结局指标的选择提供依据。

方法

从三个临床中心招募156例慢性心力衰竭患者,根据辨证给予中药治疗。按照纽约心脏病协会标准对患者进行分级,并用CMSRS-HF、MLHFQ和SF-36进行评估。采用三种反应度量化技术:配对t检验、效应量(ES)和标准化反应均数(SRM)。

结果

a)治疗2周后,CMSRS-HF评分显著降低,而MLHFQ和SF-36各维度评分均显著升高(P=0.000)。b)CMSRS-HF的ES大于0.8。MLHFQ身体和情感维度及综合评分的ES在0.37至0.61之间;各维度、身体和情感领域及综合评分的ES在0.14至0.49之间。c)CMSRS-HF的SRM大于0.8;MLHFQ身体和情感维度及综合评分的SRM在0.53至0.92之间;各维度、身体和情感领域及综合评分的SRM在0.23至0.83之间。d)根据NYHA分级进行分层分析,急性患者(NYHA III、IV级)对主观结局指标更敏感。

结论

新设计的CMSRS-HF反应度高。然而,MLHFQ和SF-36的大多数维度反应度中等。评估中西医结合治疗慢性心力衰竭的临床疗效时,可根据实际临床表现应用不同量表。

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