School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University, Southport, Queensland, Australia; Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.
Headache. 2017 Nov;57(10):1551-1569. doi: 10.1111/head.13184. Epub 2017 Sep 19.
To evaluate an e-diary developed for measuring headaches, triggers, and medication consumption, in terms of reliability and validity, and variables such as ease of use and participant compliance.
For many decades, behavioral treatment of headaches has been evaluated via participants completing paper diaries recording their headaches and associated phenomena. There is some limited evidence supporting the reliability and validity of paper diaries, and criticisms have been offered such as the large amount of effort involved for both participants and researchers. This study evaluates a new e-diary that will operate on virtually any device that can connect to the internet, and yields 5 of the recommended outcome measures.
One hundred and eighty-one participants (146 females, 35 males) were allocated to 2 groups, e-diaries vs paper diaries, via a disproportionate stratified allocation process. The e-diary group included 4 subgroups based on the technology available to the participant, and the paper diary group included 2 subgroups, one parallel to the e-dairies (short paper), and one representative of traditional paper diaries (long paper). The study commenced with individuals who had self-identified as headache and migraine sufferers attending a screening session that included headache diagnosis. Participants who met selection criteria then completed the Headache Disability Inventory and a measure of quality of life (SF-36) to assess the convergent validity of the diaries, and the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales to assess the discriminant validity of the diaries. They also completed a Measure of Acceptance Questionnaire. Participants then completed the headache diaries over the next 30 days. Finally, participants completed for a second time the questionnaires completed previously.
The 5 outcome measures - headache frequency, peak intensity, average intensity, duration, and medication usage - were found to have strong test-retest reliability (r, 0.68-0.79), for all 3 types of diary. These 5 measures for the e-diaries were shown to have good convergent validity via comparison with scores on the Headache Disability Inventory (r, 0.46-0.55) and SF-36 (r, -0.35 to -0.49), and divergent validity via comparison with scores on the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale (r, 0.10-0.25). The long-paper diaries had significantly higher missing data scores (M = 15.20, SD = 14.84) and more errors in data completion (M = 5.47, SD = 3.28) than the e-diaries and short-paper diaries (P < .05). In addition, the long-paper diaries were evaluated by the participants as more burdensome and significantly less easy to use than the e-diaries and short-paper diaries.
The e-diaries evaluated in this research would prove a useful tool in clinical trials of behavioral treatment for headaches.
评估一种用于测量头痛、诱因和药物使用情况的电子日记,评估其可靠性和有效性,以及易用性和参与者依从性等变量。
几十年来,通过参与者完成记录头痛及其相关现象的纸质日记,对头痛的行为治疗进行了评估。有一些有限的证据支持纸质日记的可靠性和有效性,并且已经提出了一些批评意见,例如参与者和研究人员都需要付出大量的努力。本研究评估了一种新的电子日记,它可以在几乎任何可以连接到互联网的设备上运行,并产生 5 项推荐的结果测量指标。
通过不成比例的分层分配过程,将 181 名参与者(146 名女性,35 名男性)分为电子日记组和纸质日记组。电子日记组根据参与者可获得的技术分为 4 个小组,纸质日记组分为 2 个小组,一个与电子日记平行(短纸),另一个代表传统的纸质日记(长纸)。研究开始时,自我认定为头痛和偏头痛患者的个人参加了一个筛选会议,该会议包括头痛诊断。符合选择标准的参与者然后完成头痛残疾量表和生活质量量表(SF-36),以评估日记的收敛效度,并使用抑郁焦虑压力量表评估日记的区分效度。他们还完成了接受度问卷。然后,参与者在接下来的 30 天内完成头痛日记。最后,参与者第二次完成之前完成的问卷。
5 项结果测量指标 - 头痛频率、峰值强度、平均强度、持续时间和药物使用 - 对于所有 3 种日记类型,均具有很强的重测信度(r,0.68-0.79)。通过与头痛残疾量表(r,0.46-0.55)和 SF-36(r,-0.35 至-0.49)的评分比较,电子日记的这 5 项指标显示出良好的收敛效度,通过与抑郁焦虑和压力量表的评分比较(r,0.10-0.25)显示出良好的区分效度。长纸日记的缺失数据评分(M=15.20,SD=14.84)明显高于电子日记和短纸日记(P<0.05),数据完成错误(M=5.47,SD=3.28)也明显多于电子日记和短纸日记。此外,长纸日记被参与者评估为比电子日记和短纸日记更繁琐,使用起来明显不方便。
本研究评估的电子日记将成为头痛行为治疗临床试验中的有用工具。