评估疼痛型糖尿病周围神经病变患者自我评估治疗版本II(随访版本)的测量特性

Q2 Medicine Pain Research and Treatment Pub Date : 2017-01-16 DOI:10.1155/2017/6080648
F. V. van Nooten, D. Trundell, D. Staniewska, Jun Chen, E. Davies, D. Revicki
{"title":"评估疼痛型糖尿病周围神经病变患者自我评估治疗版本II(随访版本)的测量特性","authors":"F. V. van Nooten, D. Trundell, D. Staniewska, Jun Chen, E. Davies, D. Revicki","doi":"10.1155/2017/6080648","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background. The Self-Assessment of Treatment version II (SAT II) measures treatment-related improvements in pain and impacts and impressions of treatment in neuropathic pain patients. The measure has baseline and follow-up versions. This study assesses the measurement properties of the SAT II. Methods. Data from 369 painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (PDPN) patients from a phase III trial assessing capsaicin 8% patch (Qutenza®) efficacy and safety were used in these analyses. Reliability, convergent validity, known-groups validity, and responsiveness (using the Brief Pain Inventory-Diabetic Neuropathy [BPI-DN] and Patient Global Impression of Change [PGIC]) analyses were conducted, and minimally important differences (MID) were estimated. Results. Exploratory factor analysis supported a one-factor solution for the six impact items. The SAT II has good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha: 0.96) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients: 0.62–0.88). Assessment of convergent validity showed moderate to strong correlations with change in other study endpoints. Scores varied significantly by level of pain intensity and sleep interference (p < 0.05) defined by the BPI-DN. Responsiveness was shown based on the PGIC. MID estimates ranged from 1.2 to 2.4 (pain improvement) and 1.0 to 2.0 (impact scores). Conclusions. The SAT II is a reliable and valid measure for assessing treatment improvement in PDPN patients.","PeriodicalId":19786,"journal":{"name":"Pain Research and Treatment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2017/6080648","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the Measurement Properties of the Self-Assessment of Treatment Version II, Follow-Up Version, in Patients with Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy\",\"authors\":\"F. V. van Nooten, D. Trundell, D. Staniewska, Jun Chen, E. Davies, D. Revicki\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2017/6080648\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background. The Self-Assessment of Treatment version II (SAT II) measures treatment-related improvements in pain and impacts and impressions of treatment in neuropathic pain patients. The measure has baseline and follow-up versions. This study assesses the measurement properties of the SAT II. Methods. Data from 369 painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (PDPN) patients from a phase III trial assessing capsaicin 8% patch (Qutenza®) efficacy and safety were used in these analyses. Reliability, convergent validity, known-groups validity, and responsiveness (using the Brief Pain Inventory-Diabetic Neuropathy [BPI-DN] and Patient Global Impression of Change [PGIC]) analyses were conducted, and minimally important differences (MID) were estimated. Results. Exploratory factor analysis supported a one-factor solution for the six impact items. The SAT II has good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha: 0.96) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients: 0.62–0.88). Assessment of convergent validity showed moderate to strong correlations with change in other study endpoints. Scores varied significantly by level of pain intensity and sleep interference (p < 0.05) defined by the BPI-DN. Responsiveness was shown based on the PGIC. MID estimates ranged from 1.2 to 2.4 (pain improvement) and 1.0 to 2.0 (impact scores). Conclusions. The SAT II is a reliable and valid measure for assessing treatment improvement in PDPN patients.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19786,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pain Research and Treatment\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2017/6080648\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pain Research and Treatment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/6080648\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain Research and Treatment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/6080648","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

背景。治疗自我评估第二版(SAT II)测量治疗相关的疼痛改善和神经性疼痛患者治疗的影响和印象。该措施有基线和后续版本。本研究评估了SAT II的测量特性。方法。来自369名疼痛性糖尿病周围神经病变(PDPN)患者的III期试验数据用于评估辣椒素8%贴剂(Qutenza®)的疗效和安全性。进行了信度、收敛效度、已知组效度和反应性(使用简短疼痛量表-糖尿病神经病变[BPI-DN]和患者总体变化印象[PGIC])分析,并估计了最小重要差异(MID)。结果。探索性因素分析支持六个影响项目的单因素解决方案。SAT II具有良好的内部一致性(Cronbach's alpha: 0.96)和重测信度(类内相关系数:0.62-0.88)。收敛效度评估显示与其他研究终点的变化有中等到强的相关性。由BPI-DN定义的疼痛强度和睡眠干扰水平的评分差异显著(p < 0.05)。反应性以PGIC为基础。MID估计范围从1.2到2.4(疼痛改善)和1.0到2.0(影响评分)。结论。SAT II是评估PDPN患者治疗改善的可靠和有效的措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluating the Measurement Properties of the Self-Assessment of Treatment Version II, Follow-Up Version, in Patients with Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy
Background. The Self-Assessment of Treatment version II (SAT II) measures treatment-related improvements in pain and impacts and impressions of treatment in neuropathic pain patients. The measure has baseline and follow-up versions. This study assesses the measurement properties of the SAT II. Methods. Data from 369 painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (PDPN) patients from a phase III trial assessing capsaicin 8% patch (Qutenza®) efficacy and safety were used in these analyses. Reliability, convergent validity, known-groups validity, and responsiveness (using the Brief Pain Inventory-Diabetic Neuropathy [BPI-DN] and Patient Global Impression of Change [PGIC]) analyses were conducted, and minimally important differences (MID) were estimated. Results. Exploratory factor analysis supported a one-factor solution for the six impact items. The SAT II has good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha: 0.96) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients: 0.62–0.88). Assessment of convergent validity showed moderate to strong correlations with change in other study endpoints. Scores varied significantly by level of pain intensity and sleep interference (p < 0.05) defined by the BPI-DN. Responsiveness was shown based on the PGIC. MID estimates ranged from 1.2 to 2.4 (pain improvement) and 1.0 to 2.0 (impact scores). Conclusions. The SAT II is a reliable and valid measure for assessing treatment improvement in PDPN patients.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Pain Research and Treatment
Pain Research and Treatment Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Efficacy of the LED Red Light Therapy in the Treatment of Temporomandibular Disorders: Double Blind Randomized Controlled Trial. Factors Associated with Postoperative Pain among Patients after Cardiac Surgery in the Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital of Karachi, Pakistan. Lornoxicam with Low-Dose Ketamine versus Pethidine to Control Pain of Acute Renal Colic. Cryotherapy Reduced Postoperative Pain in Gynecologic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Challenges in the Analysis of Longitudinal Pain Data: Practical Lessons from a Randomized Trial of Annular Closure in Lumbar Disc Surgery.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1