Primdahl J, Esbensen B A, Pedersen A K, Bech B, de Thurah A
Danish Hospital for Rheumatic Diseases, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Sønderborg, Denmark.
Hospital of Southern Jutland, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Aabenraa, Denmark.
Scand J Rheumatol. 2021 Sep;50(5):351-359. doi: 10.1080/03009742.2020.1869301. Epub 2021 Feb 19.
: This study aimed to validate the Danish versions of the Bristol Rheumatoid Arthritis Fatigue Multi-Dimensional Questionnaire (BRAF-MDQ) and BRAF Numerical Rating Scale version 2 (NRSv2).: We tested face and content validity, internal consistency, criterion validity, construct validity, and reproducibility for the BRAF-MDQ, and face and criterion validity and reproducibility for the BRAF-NRS.: In all, 224/236 patients (95%) completed the questionnaires [70% female, mean ± sd age 59 ± 13.04 years, disease duration 11.2 ± 9.49 years, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) 0.724 ± 0.70, and 28-joint Disease Activity Score-C-reactive protein 2.55 ± 1.24]. The unidimensionality for the physical and cognitive fatigue subscales was confirmed, whereas the living with fatigue and emotional fatigue subscales were not unidimensional. Cronbach's α was 0.94 for the BRAF-MDQ total and 0.78-0.92 for the four subscales. The correlations between BRAF-MDQ and various measures were: 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) vitality subscale, 0.75; Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) anxiety subscale, 0.65; HADS depression subscale, 0.62; visual analogue scale (VAS) pain, 0.62; VAS global, 0.73; and HAQ, 0.62. The intraclass correlation coefficient for agreement was 0.995. A Bland-Altman plot showed a mean ± sd difference of -1.9 ± 3.62 for BRAF-MDQ. Correlation coefficients between the BRAF-NRSv2 subscales and other subscales were: BRAF-MDQ subscales, 0.57-0.93; SF-36 vitality subscale, 0.54-0.68; and VAS fatigue, 0.66-0.82.: The Danish BRAFs are considered valid and reliable for use among Danish patients with rheumatoid arthritis, despite the subscales living with fatigue and emotional fatigue not being unidimensional, as they are in the original version.
本研究旨在验证丹麦版的布里斯托尔类风湿关节炎疲劳多维问卷（BRAF-MDQ）和BRAF数字评定量表第2版（NRSv2）。我们测试了BRAF-MDQ的表面效度和内容效度、内部一致性、效标效度、结构效度及可重复性，以及BRAF-NRS的表面效度、效标效度和可重复性。共有224/236名患者（95%）完成了问卷[70%为女性，平均年龄±标准差为59±13.04岁，病程为11.2±9.49年，健康评估问卷（HAQ）为0.724±0.70，28关节疾病活动评分- C反应蛋白为2.55±1.24]。身体疲劳和认知疲劳分量表的单维性得到确认，而疲劳生活和情绪疲劳分量表并非单维。BRAF-MDQ总分的Cronbach's α为0.94，四个分量表的Cronbach's α为0.78 - 0.92。BRAF-MDQ与各项测量指标之间的相关性如下：36项简短健康调查问卷（SF-36）活力分量表为0.75；医院焦虑抑郁量表（HADS）焦虑分量表为0.65；HADS抑郁分量表为0.62；视觉模拟量表（VAS）疼痛为0.62；VAS整体评分为0.73；HAQ为0.62。组内相关系数一致性为0.995。Bland-Altman图显示BRAF-MDQ的平均±标准差差异为-1.9±3.62。BRAF-NRSv2分量表与其他分量表之间的相关系数如下：BRAF-MDQ分量表为0.57 - 0.
