论文部分内容阅读
目的:对躯体症状障碍B标准量表（中文版）(Chinese Version of the Somatic Symptom Disorder-B Criteria Scale，中文版SSD-12）在西部综合医院门诊患者中的信效度进行检验分析。方法:采用方便抽样法，抽选四川大学华西医院门诊患者380例进行中文版SSD-12问卷自评。以Cronbach′s α系数、Spearman-Brown 折半系数评价中文版SSD-12量表内部一致性。采用验证性因子分析法验证中文版SSD-12的“想法、感受、行为”3因子和单因子结构；以DSM-5临床定式检查-科研版的“躯体症状障碍”部分作为“金标准”对中文版SSD-12不同得分段抽选的165例患者进行访谈，检验其效标效度；通过计算中文版SSD-12与患者健康问卷躯体症状群量表（Patient Health Questionnaire-15，PHQ-15）、躯体症状量表-8（Somatic Symptom Scale-8，SSS-8）、患者健康问卷抑郁量表（Patient Health Questionnaire-9，PHQ-9）、广泛性焦虑量表（Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7，GAD-7）、健康焦虑量表（Whiteley Index-8 Scale，WI-8）之间的Pearson相关系数来评价其平行效度。结果:回收有效自评量表369份，有效访谈问卷164份。中文版SSD-12的Cronbach′s α=0.95、Spearman-Brown折半系数为0.93，2周后重测Pearson′sn r=0.91（n P<0.01）；验证性因子分析得到中文版SSD-12基本拟合了3因子结构［比较拟合指数（comparative fit index, CFI）=0.954、Tucker-Lewis指数（Tucker-Lewis index, TLI）=0.941、近似均方根误差（root mean square error of approximation, RMSEA）=0.089，90%可信区间（confidence interval，n CI）：0.076~0.102］和单因子结构（CFI=0.947，TLI=0.935，RMSEA=0.094，90%n CI：0.081~0.106）两种模型。中文版SSD-12的曲线下面积（area under the curve, AUC）=0.902（95%n CI：0.853~0.952，n P<0.01），截断值为17分（敏感度为94.40%，特异度为82.80%）。中文版SSD-12总分与PHQ-15、SSS-8、GAD-7、PHQ-9、WI-8总分之间的Pearson相关系数分别为：0.54、0.63、0.62、0.53、0.79（均n P<0.01）。n 结论:躯体症状障碍B标准量表（中文版）在西部综合医院门诊患者中具有较好的信度和效度。“,”Objective:To test the reliability and validity of the Somatic Symptom Disorder-B Criteria Scale (Chinese Version) in the outpatients of general hospitals in west China.Method:A total of 380 outpatients who visited their doctors at Huaxi Medical Center of Sichuan University were recruited into the study through a convenience sampling. Cronbach′s α and Spearman-Brown halving coefficient were used to evaluate the internal consistency of the Chinese Version of SSD-12. Confirmatory factor analysis （CFA） was used to check a three-factor （cognitive, affective and behavioral） and a general one-factor structure of the Chinese Version of SSD-12; The SSD section of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM Disorders, Fifth Edition, Research Version(SCID-5-RV) was used as the “gold standard” to interview 165 patients, selected in different scores ranges of the Chinese Version of SSD-12, to test the criterion validity. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to test the convergent validity by the association with Patient Health Questionnaire-15 (PHQ-15), Somatic Symptom Scale-8(SSS-8), Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) and Whiteley Index-8 Scale (WI-8).Result:A total of 369 effective self-assessment scales and 164 effective interview questionnaires were selected in the final analysis, the Cronbach′s α coefficient and Spearman-Brown halving coefficient of the Chinese Version of SSD-12 scale were 0.95 and 0.93, respectively. The two-week retest Pearson′s n r=0.91 (n P<0.01).The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) fit a three-factor structure model (comparative fit index (CFI)=0.954, Tucker-Lewis index （TLI）=0.941, root mean square error of approximation （RMSEA）=0.089, 90%n CI:0.076-0.102), and a general one-factor model (CFI=0.947, TLI=0.935, RMSEA=0.094, 90%n CI:0.081-0.106) of the SSD-12. The area under the curve (AUC) of the Chinese version SSD-12 was 0.902 (95%n CI: 0.853-0.952, n P<0.01), the cutoff value was 17 points with the sensitivity 94.40% and the specificity 82.80%. The Pearson correlation coefficients between the Chinese version of SSD-12 and PHQ-15, SSS-8, GAD-7, PHQ-9, and WI-8 were 0.54, 0.63, 0.62, 0.53 and 0.79 accordingly (n P<0.01 for all).n Conclusion:The Chinese Version of SSD-12 presents with pretty high reliability and validity in the outpatients of general hospitals in China.