Balioussis Christina, Hitzig Sander L, Flett Heather, Noreau Luc, Craven B Catharine
Lyndhurst Centre, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute - University Health Network , Toronto, Ontario , Canada.
Institute for Life Course and Aging, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto , Toronto, Ontario , Canada.
Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil. 2014 Summer;20(3):208-24. doi: 10.1310/sci2003-208.
To identify and classify tools for assessing the influence of spasticity on quality of life (QOL) after spinal cord injury (SCI).
Electronic databases (MEDLINE/PubMed CINAHL and PsycInfo) were searched for studies published between 1975 and 2012. Dijkers's theoretical framework on QOL was used to classify tools as either objective or subjective measures of QOL.
Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Identified objective measures that were used to assess the influence of spasticity on QOL included the Short Form-36 (SF-36) the Sickness Impact Profile (SIP) and the Health Utilities Index-III (HUI-III). Subjective measures included the Quality of Life Index-SCI Version III (QLI-SCI) Life Situation Questionnaire-Revised (LSQ-R) Reciprocal Support Scale (RSS) Profile of Mood States (POMS) Spinal Cord Injury Spasticity Evaluation Tool (SCI-SET) and the Patient Reported Impact of Spasticity Measure (PRISM). A number of tools proved either to be insensitive to the presence of spasticity (QLI-SCI) or yielded mixed (SF-36) or weak (RSS LSQ-R) results. Tools that were sensitive to spasticity had limited psychometric data for use in the SCI population (HUI-III SIP POMS) although 2 were developed specifically for assessing spasticity on daily life post SCI (SCI-SET PRISM).
Two condition-specific subjective measures the SCI-SET and PRISM emerged as the most promising tools for the assessment of spasticity impact on QOL after SCI. Further research should focus on establishing the psychometric properties of these measures for use in the SCI population.Key words: outcome measurement quality of life spasticity spinal cord injury.
识别并分类用于评估痉挛对脊髓损伤（SCI）后生活质量（QOL）影响的工具。
检索电子数据库（MEDLINE/PubMed、CINAHL和PsycInfo）中1975年至2012年发表的研究。采用迪杰克关于生活质量的理论框架将工具分类为生活质量的客观或主观测量方法。
16项研究符合纳入标准。用于评估痉挛对生活质量影响的已识别客观测量方法包括简明健康状况调查量表（SF-36）、疾病影响量表（SIP）和健康效用指数-III（HUI-III）。主观测量方法包括生活质量指数-SCI第三版（QLI-SCI）、修订后的生活状况问卷（LSQ-R）、相互支持量表（RSS）、情绪状态剖面图（POMS）、脊髓损伤痉挛评估工具（SCI-SET）和患者报告的痉挛影响测量量表（PRISM）。一些工具被证明对痉挛的存在不敏感（QLI-SCI），或者产生混合结果（SF-36）或微弱结果（RSS、LSQ-R）。对痉挛敏感的工具在脊髓损伤人群中使用的心理测量数据有限（HUI-III、SIP、POMS），尽管有2种是专门为评估脊髓损伤后日常生活中的痉挛而开发的（SCI-SET、PRISM）。
两种针对特定情况的主观测量方法，即SCI-SET和PRISM，成为评估痉挛对脊髓损伤后生活质量影响的最有前景的工具。进一步的研究应侧重于确定这些测量方法在脊髓损伤人群中使用的心理测量特性。关键词：结果测量；生活质量；痉挛；脊髓损伤
