Suppr超能文献

数字疼痛评分量表和颈椎源性头痛患者颈椎功能障碍指数的心理测量特性。

Psychometric properties of the Numeric Pain Rating Scale and Neck Disability Index in patients with cervicogenic headache.

机构信息

1 CORA Physical Therapy, Savannah, GA, USA.

2 American Academy of Manipulative Therapy, Montgomery, AL, USA.

出版信息

Cephalalgia. 2019 Jan;39(1):44-51. doi: 10.1177/0333102418772584. Epub 2018 Apr 19.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Self-reported disability and pain intensity are commonly used outcomes in patients with cervicogenic headaches. However, there is a paucity of psychometric evidence to support the use of these self-report outcomes for individuals treated with cervicogenic headaches. Therefore, it is unknown if these measures are reliable, responsive, or result in meaningful clinically important changes in this patient population.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial (n = 110) examining the effects of spinal manipulative therapy with and without exercise in patients with cervicogenic headaches. Reliability, construct validity, responsiveness and thresholds for minimal detectable change and clinically important difference values were calculated for the Neck Disability Index and Numeric Pain Rating Scale.

RESULTS

The Neck Disability Index exhibited excellent reliability (ICC = 0.92; [95 % CI: 0.46-0.97]), while the Numeric Pain Rating Scale exhibited moderate reliability (ICC = 0.72; [95 % CI: 0.08-0.90]) in the short term. Both instruments also exhibited adequate responsiveness (area under the curve; range = 0.78-0.93) and construct validity ( p < 0.001) in this headache population.

CONCLUSIONS

Both instruments seem well suited as short-term self-report measures for patients with cervicogenic headaches. Clinicians and researchers should expect at least a 2.5-point reduction on the numeric pain rating scale and a 5.5-point reduction on the neck disability index after 4 weeks of intervention to be considered clinically meaningful.

摘要

背景

在颈源性头痛患者中,自我报告的残疾和疼痛强度是常用的结果。然而,用于治疗颈源性头痛患者的这些自我报告结果的心理测量证据很少。因此,尚不清楚这些措施是否可靠、敏感,或者是否会导致该患者群体的有意义的临床重要变化。

方法

对一项随机临床试验(n=110)的二次分析,该试验检查了颈源性头痛患者接受脊柱手法治疗联合和不联合运动治疗的效果。计算了颈痛指数量表和数字疼痛评分量表的可靠性、结构效度、反应性以及最小可检测变化和临床重要差异值的阈值。

结果

颈痛指数量表在短期表现出极好的可靠性(ICC=0.92;[95%置信区间:0.46-0.97]),而数字疼痛评分量表表现出中度可靠性(ICC=0.72;[95%置信区间:0.08-0.90])。在该头痛人群中,这两种工具也表现出足够的反应性(曲线下面积;范围=0.78-0.93)和结构效度(p<0.001)。

结论

这两种工具似乎都非常适合作为颈源性头痛患者的短期自我报告测量工具。临床医生和研究人员应该期望在干预后 4 周内,数字疼痛评分量表至少降低 2.5 分,颈痛指数量表降低 5.5 分,才被认为具有临床意义。

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