Suppr超能文献

偏头痛残疾评估量表(MIDAS)评分与基于日记的测量方法在偏头痛患者人群样本中的有效性比较。

Validity of the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) score in comparison to a diary-based measure in a population sample of migraine sufferers.

作者信息

Stewart Walter F, Lipton Richard B, Kolodner Kenneth B, Sawyer James, Lee Clara, Liberman Joshua N

机构信息

Department of Epidemiology, The Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health, 615 North Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA Innovative Medical Research, Inc., 1001 Cromwell Bridge Road, Towson, MD 21285, USA Department of Neurology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and the Headache Unit, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA Department of Epidemiology and Social Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine and the Headache Unit, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY, USA Zeneca Pharmaceuticals, Alderley Park, Macclesfield, UK.

出版信息

Pain. 2000 Oct;88(1):41-52. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(00)00305-5.

Abstract

The Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire is a brief, self-administered questionnaire designed to quantify headache-related disability over a 3 month period. The MIDAS score has been shown to have moderately high test-retest reliability in headache sufferers and is correlated with clinical judgment regarding the need for medical care. The aim of the study was to examine the validity of the MIDAS score, and the five items comprising the score, compared to data from a 90 day daily diary used, in part, to record acute disability from headache. In a population-based sample, 144 clinically diagnosed migraine headache sufferers were enrolled in a 90 day diary study and completed the MIDAS questionnaire at the end of the study. The daily diary was used to record detailed information on headache features as well as activity limitations in work, household chores, and non-work activities (social, family and leisure activities). The MIDAS score was the sum of missed work or school days, missed household chores days, missed non-work activity days, and days at work or school plus days of household chores where productivity was reduced by half or more in the last 3 months. Validity was assessed by comparing MIDAS items and the MIDAS score with equivalent measures derived from the diary. The MIDAS items for missed days of work or school (mean 0.96, median 0) and for missed days of household work (mean 3.64, median 2.0) were similar to the corresponding diary-based estimates of missed work or school (mean 1.23, median 0) and of missed household work (mean 3.93, median 2.01). Values for missed days of non-work activities (MIDAS mean 2.6 and median 1 versus diary mean 2.22 and median 0.95) were also similar. Responses to MIDAS questions about number of days where productivity was reduced by half or more in work (mean 3.77, median 2.00) and in household work (mean 3.92, median 2.00) significantly overestimated the corresponding diary-based measures for work (mean 2.94, median 1.06) and household work (mean 2.22, median 0.98). Nonetheless, the overall MIDAS score (mean 14.53, median 9.0) was not significantly different form the reference diary-based measure (mean 13.5, median 8.4). The correlation between the MIDAS summary score and an equivalent diary score was 0.63. The group estimate of the MIDAS score was found to be a valid estimate of a rigorous diary-based measure of disability. The mean and median values for the MIDAS score in a population-based sample of migraine cases were similar to equivalent diary measures. The correlation between the two measures was in the low moderate range, but expected given that two very different methods of data collection were compared.

摘要

偏头痛残疾评估(MIDAS)问卷是一份简短的自填式问卷,旨在量化3个月内与头痛相关的残疾情况。MIDAS评分在头痛患者中显示出具有中等偏高的重测信度,并且与关于医疗护理需求的临床判断相关。本研究的目的是将MIDAS评分及其包含的五个项目与一份90天日常日记中的数据进行比较,以检验MIDAS评分的有效性,该日记部分用于记录头痛导致的急性残疾情况。在一个基于人群的样本中,144名临床诊断为偏头痛的患者参与了一项为期90天的日记研究,并在研究结束时完成了MIDAS问卷。日常日记用于记录有关头痛特征以及工作、家务和非工作活动(社交、家庭和休闲活动)中的活动受限的详细信息。MIDAS评分是过去3个月内错过的工作日或上学日、错过的家务日、错过的非工作活动日以及工作或上学日加上家务日(其中生产力降低一半或更多)的总和。通过将MIDAS项目和MIDAS评分与从日记中得出的等效测量值进行比较来评估有效性。MIDAS中关于错过的工作日或上学日的项目(均值0.96,中位数0)以及关于错过的家务日的项目(均值3.64,中位数2.0)与基于日记的相应错过工作日或上学日的估计值(均值1.23,中位数0)以及错过家务的估计值(均值3.93,中位数2.01)相似。非工作活动错过天数的值(MIDAS均值2.6,中位数1,而日记均值2.22,中位数0.95)也相似。对MIDAS关于工作中生产力降低一半或更多的天数(均值3.77,中位数2.00)和家务中生产力降低一半或更多的天数(均值3.92,中位数2.00)的问题的回答显著高估了基于日记的相应工作(均值2.94,中位数1.06)和家务(均值2.22,中位数0.98)的测量值。尽管如此,MIDAS总分(均值14.53,中位数9.0)与基于日记的参考测量值(均值13.5,中位数8.4)没有显著差异。MIDAS汇总评分与等效日记评分之间的相关性为0.63。发现MIDAS评分的组估计值是基于严格日记的残疾测量值的有效估计。在基于人群的偏头痛病例样本中,MIDAS评分的均值和中位数与等效日记测量值相似。两种测量方法之间的相关性处于低中等范围,但鉴于比较的是两种非常不同的数据收集方法,这是可以预期的。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验