PloS one · 2013
Psychometrics of the Short Form 36 Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2) and the Quality of Life Scale for Drug Addicts (QOL-DAv2.0) in Chinese mainland patients with methadone maintenance treatment.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhou Kaina, Zhuang Guihua, Zhang Hongmei, Liang Peifeng, Yin Juan, Kou Lingling, Hao Mengmeng, You Lijuan
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To test psychometrics of the Short Form 36 Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2) and the Quality of Life Scale for Drug Addicts (QOL-DAv2.0) in Chinese mainland patients with methadone maintenance treatment (MMT).
METHODS: A total of 1,212 patients were recruited from two MMT clinics in Xi'an, China. Reliability was estimated with Cronbach's α and intra-class correlation (ICC). Convergent and discriminant validity was assessed using multitrait-multimethod correlation matrix. Sensitivity was measured with ANOVA and relative efficiency. Responsiveness was evaluated by pre-post paired-samples t-test and standardized response mean based on the patients' health status changes following 6-month period.
RESULTS: Cronbach's α of the SF-36v2 physical and mental summary components were 0.80 and 0.86 (eight scales range 0.73-0.92) and the QOL-DAv2.0 was 0.96 (four scales range: 0.80-0.93). ICC of the SF-36v2 two components were 0.86 and 0.85 (eight scales range: 0.72-0.87) and the QOL-DAv2.0 was 0.94 (four scales range: 0.88-0.92). Convergent validity was lower between the two instruments (γ <0.70) while discriminant validity was acceptable within each instrument. Sensitivity was satisfied in self-evaluated health status (both instruments) and average daily methadone dose (SF-36v2 physical functioning and vitality scales; QOL-DAv2.0 except psychology scale). Responsiveness was acceptable in the improved health status change (SF-36v2 except vitality scale; QOL-DAv2.0 except psychology and symptoms scales) and deteriorated health status change (SF-36v2 except vitality, social functioning and mental health scales; QOL-DAv2.0 except society scale).
CONCLUSIONS: The SF-36v2 and the QOL-DAv2.0 are valid tools and can be used independently or complementary according to different emphases of health-related quality of life evaluation in patients with MMT.
METHODS: A total of 1,212 patients were recruited from two MMT clinics in Xi'an, China. Reliability was estimated with Cronbach's α and intra-class correlation (ICC). Convergent and discriminant validity was assessed using multitrait-multimethod correlation matrix. Sensitivity was measured with ANOVA and relative efficiency. Responsiveness was evaluated by pre-post paired-samples t-test and standardized response mean based on the patients' health status changes following 6-month period.
RESULTS: Cronbach's α of the SF-36v2 physical and mental summary components were 0.80 and 0.86 (eight scales range 0.73-0.92) and the QOL-DAv2.0 was 0.96 (four scales range: 0.80-0.93). ICC of the SF-36v2 two components were 0.86 and 0.85 (eight scales range: 0.72-0.87) and the QOL-DAv2.0 was 0.94 (four scales range: 0.88-0.92). Convergent validity was lower between the two instruments (γ <0.70) while discriminant validity was acceptable within each instrument. Sensitivity was satisfied in self-evaluated health status (both instruments) and average daily methadone dose (SF-36v2 physical functioning and vitality scales; QOL-DAv2.0 except psychology scale). Responsiveness was acceptable in the improved health status change (SF-36v2 except vitality scale; QOL-DAv2.0 except psychology and symptoms scales) and deteriorated health status change (SF-36v2 except vitality, social functioning and mental health scales; QOL-DAv2.0 except society scale).
CONCLUSIONS: The SF-36v2 and the QOL-DAv2.0 are valid tools and can be used independently or complementary according to different emphases of health-related quality of life evaluation in patients with MMT.