Hutti Marianne H, Myers John, Hall Lynne A, Polivka Barbara J, White Susan, Hill Janice, Kloenne Elizabeth, Hayden Jaclyn, Grisanti Meredith McGrew
University of Louisville, School of Nursing, 555 S. Floyd Street, Louisville, KY 40202, USA.
University of Louisville, School of Medicine, USA.
J Psychosom Res. 2017 Oct;101:128-134. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2017.07.016. Epub 2017 Aug 2.
The Perinatal Grief Intensity Scale (PGIS) was developed for clinical use to identify and predict intense grief and need for follow-up after perinatal loss. This study evaluates the validity of the PGIS via its ability to predict future intense grief based on a PGIS score obtained early after a loss.
A prospective observational study was conducted with 103 international, English-speaking women recruited at hospital discharge or via the internet who experienced a miscarriage, stillbirth, or neonatal death within the previous 8weeks. Survey data were collected at baseline using the PGIS and the Perinatal Grief Scale (PGS). Follow-up data on the PGS were obtained 3months later. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, Cronbach's alpha, receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis.
Cronbach's alphas were ≥0.70 for both instruments. PGIS factor analysis yielded three factors as predicted, explaining 57.7% of the variance. The optimal cutoff identified for the PGIS was 3.535. No difference was found when the ability of the PGIS to identify intense grief was compared to the PGS (p=0.754). The PGIS was not inferior to the PGS (AUC=0.78, 95% CI 0.68-0.88, p<0.001) in predicting intense grief at the follow-up. A PGIS score≥3.53 at baseline was associated with increased grief intensity at Time 2 (PGS: OR=1.97, 95% CI 1.59-2.34, p<0.001).
The PGIS is comparable to the PGS, has a lower response burden, and can reliably and validly predict women who may experience future intense grief associated with perinatal loss.
围产期悲伤强度量表（PGIS）是为临床应用而开发的，用于识别和预测围产期丧亲后的强烈悲伤及后续随访需求。本研究通过PGIS在丧亲后早期获得的分数预测未来强烈悲伤的能力来评估PGIS的有效性。
对103名国际上以英语为母语的女性进行了一项前瞻性观察研究，这些女性在出院时或通过互联网招募，她们在过去8周内经历了流产、死产或新生儿死亡。在基线时使用PGIS和围产期悲伤量表（PGS）收集调查数据。3个月后获得PGS的随访数据。数据分析包括描述性统计、克朗巴赫α系数、受试者工作特征曲线分析和验证性因素分析。
两种量表的克朗巴赫α系数均≥0.70。PGIS因素分析如预期产生了三个因素，解释了57.7%的方差。确定的PGIS最佳临界值为3.535。将PGIS识别强烈悲伤的能力与PGS进行比较时未发现差异（p = 0.754）。在预测随访时的强烈悲伤方面，PGIS不劣于PGS（AUC = 0.78，95%CI 0.68 - 0.88，p < 0.001）。基线时PGIS评分≥3.53与第2期悲伤强度增加相关（PGS：OR = 1.97，95%CI 1.59 - 2.34，p < 0.001）。
PGIS与PGS相当，反应负担更低，能够可靠且有效地预测可能经历与围产期丧亲相关的未来强烈悲伤的女性。
