Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Department of Public Health and Nursing, General Practitioner Research Unit, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), 7491 Trondheim, Norway, Phone: +4741236597.
Research Unit for General Practice, NORCE Norwegian Research Centre, Bergen, Norway.
Scand J Pain. 2020 Oct 25;20(4):663-672. doi: 10.1515/sjpain-2020-0002.
Background and aims The ACR1990 criteria of fibromyalgia (FM) have been criticized due to poor reliability of tender points counting (TPC), inconsistent definitions of the widespread pain, and by not considering other symptoms than pain in the FM phenotype. Therefore, several newer self-report measures for FM criteria have emerged. The aim of this study was to translate the fibromyalgia survey questionnaire (FSQ) to Norwegian and validate both the 2011 and the 2016 fibromyalgia survey diagnostic criteria (FSDC) against the ACR1990 criteria. Methods One hundred and twenty chronic pain patients formerly diagnosed with fibromyalgia according to the ACR1990 criteria, and 62 controls not diagnosed or where fibromyalgia was not suspected, were enrolled in this study. All responded to a Norwegian version of the FSQ. Also, they had a clinical examination according to ACR1990 fibromyalgia criteria including a counting of significant tender points with an algometer (TPC). The FSQ with the Widespread Pain Index (WPI) and Symptom Severity scale (SSS) subscales, Fibromyalgia Severity (FS) sum score, was examined for correlations with the fibromyalgia impact questionnaire (FIQ) and TPCs. Face-validity, internal consistence, test-retest reliability and construct validity with convergent and divergent approaches were examined and a Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) analysis was performed. Results The internal consistency of FS measured by Cronbach's alfa was good (=0.904). The test-retest reliability measures using intra class correlation were respectable for the FS, including WPI and SSS subscales (0.86, 0.84 and 0.87). FS, WPI and SSS correlated significantly with FIQ (0.74, 0.59 and 0.85) and TPC indicating an adequate construct, convergent validity. The medians of FS, WPI and SSS in the fibromyalgia-group were significantly different from the non-fibromyalgia-group indicating good construct, divergent validity. Using the 2011 and 2016 FSDC vs. ACR 1990 as a reference, sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR +) and negative likelihood ratio (LR-) were identified. The accuracy rate for both 2011 and 2016 FSDC were respectable (84%). ROC analysis using FS revealed a very good Area Under the Curve (AUC) = 0.860. Conclusion The current study revealed that the Norwegian versions of FSQ is a valid tool for assessment of fibromyalgia according to the 2011 and 2016 (FSDC).
纤维肌痛(FM)的 ACR1990 标准由于压痛计数(TPC)的可靠性差、广泛疼痛的定义不一致以及未考虑 FM 表型中的其他疼痛以外的症状而受到批评。因此,已经出现了几种新的用于 FM 标准的自我报告措施。本研究的目的是将纤维肌痛调查问卷(FSQ)翻译成挪威语,并根据 ACR1990 标准验证 2011 年和 2016 年纤维肌痛调查诊断标准(FSDC)。
本研究纳入了 120 名根据 ACR1990 标准诊断为纤维肌痛的慢性疼痛患者和 62 名未被诊断或怀疑患有纤维肌痛的对照组。所有患者均接受了挪威版 FSQ 的调查。此外,他们还根据 ACR1990 纤维肌痛标准进行了临床检查,包括使用压痛计(TPC)计数明显的压痛点。还检查了 FSQ 的广泛性疼痛指数(WPI)和症状严重程度量表(SSS)子量表、纤维肌痛严重程度(FS)总分与纤维肌痛影响问卷(FIQ)和 TPCs 的相关性。检查了表面效度、内部一致性、测试-重测信度和与收敛和发散方法相关的结构效度,并进行了接收器工作特征(ROC)分析。
用 Cronbach's alfa 评估 FS 的内部一致性良好(=0.904)。使用组内相关的测试-重测信度测量值对于 FS、WPI 和 SSS 子量表是可靠的(0.86、0.84 和 0.87)。FS、WPI 和 SSS 与 FIQ(0.74、0.59 和 0.85)和 TPC 显著相关,表明具有足够的结构、收敛效度。纤维肌痛组的 FS、WPI 和 SSS 的中位数与非纤维肌痛组的中位数明显不同,表明具有良好的结构、发散效度。使用 2011 年和 2016 年 FSDC 与 ACR 1990 作为参考,确定了敏感性、特异性、阳性似然比(LR+)和阴性似然比(LR-)。2011 年和 2016 年 FSDC 的准确率均令人满意(84%)。使用 FS 的 ROC 分析显示,曲线下面积(AUC)非常好(=0.860)。
本研究表明,FSQ 的挪威版本是一种根据 2011 年和 2016 年(FSDC)评估纤维肌痛的有效工具。