疲劳自评量表的信、效度评价

Estimation on the Reliability and Validity of the Fatigue Self-assessment Scale

目的评价疲劳自评量表的信、效度。方法通过将疲劳自评量表用于4组不同的人群,比较其疲劳类型、程度及特征的差异,采用SPSS和LISREL统计软件中的内部一致性信度分析、探索性因子分析和验证性因子分析的方法,对量表的信度、结构效度进行检验。结果4组受试人群的疲劳类型、程度及特征差异有统计学意义,量表各因子格朗巴赫系数(Cronbach's alpha)为0.772～0.908;量表中反映疲劳类型及程度部分的RMSEA(近似误差的均方根)=0.065,NNFI(非范拟合指数)=0.95,CFI(比较拟合指数)=0.96;反映疲劳特征部分的RMSEA=0.10,NNFI=0.93,CFI=0.96。结论该疲劳自评量表用于评定不同人群的疲劳类型、程度及特征时,具有良好的区分度、信度及结构效度。为了进一步探索疲劳的类型、程度及特征与中医证候的关系,在今后的疲劳评定及疲劳干预效果评价的应用中应与中医辨证相结合。

Objective To analyze the reliability and validity of the Fatigue Self-assessment Scale （FSAS）. Methods The scale was applied among the participants assigned to 4 groups, the differences in types, degrees and characteristics of fatigue of them were compared, and the reliability and constitutional validity of FSAS were as- sessed by internal consistency analysis, exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis using the statisti- cal software of SPSS and LISREL. Results Statistical differences of types, degrees and characteristics of fatigue presented in the participants of the 4 groups. The Cronbach＇s alpha of various factors in the scale were 0. 772 - 0. 908 ; the indexes for the section of assessing type, and degree of fatigue were ： RMSEA = 0. 065, NNFI = 0. 95, CFI =0. 96; and those for the section of assessing characteristics of fatigue were： RMSEA = 0. 10, NNFI = 0. 93, CFI = 0. 96. Conclusion The FSAS has good differentiability, reliability and constitutional validity for assessing the type, degree and characteristics of fatigue in various populations. In order to explore the relationship of TCM syndrome patterns with the type, degree and characteristics of fatigue, its future application for evaluation of fatigue and intervention effect of anti-fatigue should be combined with TCM syndrome differentiation.