血虚证中医疗效评价量表条目筛选

Items selection of blood deficiency efficacy evaluation scale of traditional Chinese medicine

目的:筛选血虚中医疗效评价量表条目,为形成最终血虚证量表奠定基础。方法:纳入21名健康者和50例血虚证患者,应用统计学方法对量表条目的可行性、敏感性、独立性与代表性、内部一致性等方面进行筛选,结合专家意见,形成最终量表。结果:量表可行性良好,无天花板地板效应;敏感性良好,可区分血虚患者及健康人群;独立性与代表性良好,spearman相关系数>0.4,因子分析将量表分为3个公因子:公因子1包括条目1(头晕)、2(头晕影响思考)、3(头晕想休息)、4(健忘),公因子2包括条目5(心悸)、6(失眠多梦)、9(皮肤干)、10(四肢麻木),公因子3包括条目7(气色差)、8(眼花或眼干涩)、11(身体疼痛)。与初始框架有差异,建议调整框架;总表克朗巴赫系数为0.868,内部一致性良好。专家讨论将量表理论框架微调,量表条目不变。结论:血虚证中医疗效评价量表可行性好,敏感性良好,代表性和独立性较好,内部一致性较好,下一步应扩大样本量进行量表考评。

Objective:To select the items of blood deficiency efficacy evaluation scale of traditional Chinese medicine(TCM)and lay a foundation for the formation of the final blood deficiency questionnaire.Methods:A total of 21 normal persons and 50 blood deficiency syndrome patients were included.Sensitivity,variability,independence,representativeness and internal consistency of the items,and the final questionnaire was formed by combining expert opinions.Results:The feasibility of the questionnaire was good,without ceiling and floor effect.With good sensitivity,it could distinguish patients with blood deficiency from healthy people.The independence and representativeness were good,and the spearman correlation coefficient range were>0.4.The questionnaire was divided into three common factors by factor analysis.The common factor 1 included item 1(dizziness),2(avoid thinking because dizzy),3(need a break because dizzy),4(forgetfulness),common factor 2 included item 5(palpitation),6(dream more),9(dry skin),10(numbness of limb skin),and common factor 3 included item 7(bad complexion),8(dazzling or dry eyes),and 11(limb restraint).There was little difference with the original frame,it is recommended to adjust the frame.The Cronbach’sαcoefficient in the general table was 0.868,with good internal consistency.Experts discussed making small adjustments to the theoretical framework of the questionnaire and keeping the items unchanged.Conclusion:Blood deficiency efficacy evaluation scale of TCM has good feasibility,good variability,good sensitivity,good representativeness and independence,and good internal consistency.The next step is to expand the sample size for questionnaire evaluation.