Verification of the Psychometric Characteristics of the Nijmegen Questionnaire for the Diagnosis of Dysfunctional Breathing During the COVID-19 Pandemic on a Russian Sample

E. Pervichko, O. Mitina, J. Koniukhovskaia, O. Stepanova
{"title":"Verification of the Psychometric Characteristics of the Nijmegen Questionnaire for the Diagnosis of Dysfunctional Breathing During the COVID-19 Pandemic on a Russian Sample","authors":"E. Pervichko, O. Mitina, J. Koniukhovskaia, O. Stepanova","doi":"10.17759/cpse.2022110311","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of the study was to check the psychometric properties of the Nijmegen questionnaire (NQ) (Van Dixhoorn, Duivenvoorden, 1985), aimed at diagnosing the presence of signs of dysfunctional breathing (DВ) according to self–reports of respondents in the conditions of the COVID-19 pandemic in a Russian-speaking sample. The study sample consisted of 1 362 respondents (1 153 women and 209 men) aged 18 to 88 years (mean age 38.3±11.4) who filled out an online questionnaire from April to December 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic. The following methods were used to test the construct validity of the Russian version of the NQ: 1) Perceived Stress Scale-10 (PSS-10; Ababkov et al., 2016); 2) State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI, Khanin, 1976), the scales of which were modified to measure the level of anxiety during a pandemic (State anxiety) and before the pandemic (Trait anxiety) (Pervichko et al., 2020); 3) The Symptom Check List-32 (SCL-32) (Mitina, Gorbunova, 2011); (4) An abridged version of the Six-Factor Personality Inventory HEXACO-24 (Egorova et al, 2019). The study participants also completed a socio-demographic questionnaire (Pervichko et al., 2020). The results of checking the Russian-language version of the NQ for reliability are presented: the value of the internal consistency coefficient α-Cronbach for the integral indicator = 0.877. Four subscales were identified, the indicators of which improved when the questionnaire was reduced to 10 points. Internal convergent and discriminant validity has been verified for the abridged version. The external constructive validity of the questionnaire is proved. High rates of correlation with stress, situational and personal anxiety, as well as other symptoms of psychological distress were revealed. In addition, a high correlation with emotionality has been established. The problem of the \"threshold\" value of NQ required to identify the formed symptom complex of DB is discussed. The prevalence of DB symptoms before and during the pandemic was compared. A significant difference in the indicators on the scale for men and women was established. Using the obtained Russian-language version of NQ, it was shown that in the conditions of the COVID-19 pandemic, 27.7% of the study participants who were not sick with COVID-19 showed signs of a formed DB symptom complex, which is more than twice higher than the population indicators in the pre-pandemic period. The frequency of occurrence of the holistic symptom complex of DB in women is three times higher than in men: 31.0% vs 9.1% (p<0.001). The results of the study allow us to conclude that NQ is a reliable and valid tool for diagnosing the severity of DB symptoms, which can be recommended for use as an express diagnostic tool for the presence of psychogenically caused respiratory disorders in persons complaining of \"difficulty breathing\" in the absence of objective grounds.\n","PeriodicalId":344078,"journal":{"name":"Клиническая и специальная психология","volume":"129 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Клиническая и специальная психология","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17759/cpse.2022110311","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to check the psychometric properties of the Nijmegen questionnaire (NQ) (Van Dixhoorn, Duivenvoorden, 1985), aimed at diagnosing the presence of signs of dysfunctional breathing (DВ) according to self–reports of respondents in the conditions of the COVID-19 pandemic in a Russian-speaking sample. The study sample consisted of 1 362 respondents (1 153 women and 209 men) aged 18 to 88 years (mean age 38.3±11.4) who filled out an online questionnaire from April to December 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic. The following methods were used to test the construct validity of the Russian version of the NQ: 1) Perceived Stress Scale-10 (PSS-10; Ababkov et al., 2016); 2) State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI, Khanin, 1976), the scales of which were modified to measure the level of anxiety during a pandemic (State anxiety) and before the pandemic (Trait anxiety) (Pervichko et al., 2020); 3) The Symptom Check List-32 (SCL-32) (Mitina, Gorbunova, 2011); (4) An abridged version of the Six-Factor Personality Inventory HEXACO-24 (Egorova et al, 2019). The study participants also completed a socio-demographic questionnaire (Pervichko et al., 2020). The results of checking the Russian-language version of the NQ for reliability are presented: the value of the internal consistency coefficient α-Cronbach for the integral indicator = 0.877. Four subscales were identified, the indicators of which improved when the questionnaire was reduced to 10 points. Internal convergent and discriminant validity has been verified for the abridged version. The external constructive validity of the questionnaire is proved. High rates of correlation with stress, situational and personal anxiety, as well as other symptoms of psychological distress were revealed. In addition, a high correlation with emotionality has been established. The problem of the "threshold" value of NQ required to identify the formed symptom complex of DB is discussed. The prevalence of DB symptoms before and during the pandemic was compared. A significant difference in the indicators on the scale for men and women was established. Using the obtained Russian-language version of NQ, it was shown that in the conditions of the COVID-19 pandemic, 27.7% of the study participants who were not sick with COVID-19 showed signs of a formed DB symptom complex, which is more than twice higher than the population indicators in the pre-pandemic period. The frequency of occurrence of the holistic symptom complex of DB in women is three times higher than in men: 31.0% vs 9.1% (p<0.001). The results of the study allow us to conclude that NQ is a reliable and valid tool for diagnosing the severity of DB symptoms, which can be recommended for use as an express diagnostic tool for the presence of psychogenically caused respiratory disorders in persons complaining of "difficulty breathing" in the absence of objective grounds.
Nijmegen问卷在俄罗斯COVID-19大流行期间诊断呼吸功能障碍的心理测量特征验证
本研究的目的是检查奈梅亨问卷(NQ)的心理测量特性(Van Dixhoorn, Duivenvoorden, 1985),旨在根据在COVID-19大流行条件下俄语样本中受访者的自我报告诊断呼吸功能障碍迹象的存在(DВ)。研究样本包括1 362名受访者(1 153名女性和209名男性),年龄在18至88岁(平均年龄38.3±11.4岁),他们在2019冠状病毒病大流行期间的2020年4月至12月填写了在线问卷。采用以下方法对俄文NQ量表的结构效度进行检验:1)感知压力量表-10 (PSS-10);Ababkov et al., 2016);2)状态-特质焦虑量表(STAI, Khanin, 1976),其量表经过修改,用于测量大流行期间(状态焦虑)和大流行前(特质焦虑)的焦虑水平(Pervichko等人,2020);3)症状检查表32 (SCL-32) (Mitina, Gorbunova, 2011);(4)精简版六因素人格量表HEXACO-24 (Egorova et al ., 2019)。研究参与者还完成了社会人口调查问卷(Pervichko et al., 2020)。给出了俄语版NQ信度检验结果:积分指标的内部一致性系数α-Cronbach值= 0.877。确定了四个子量表,当问卷减少到10分时,其指标有所改善。内部收敛效度和判别效度已得到验证。证明了问卷的外部建构效度。与压力、情境和个人焦虑以及其他心理困扰症状的相关性很高。此外,还建立了与情绪的高度相关。讨论了识别已形成的DB症状复合体所需的NQ“阈值”问题。比较大流行前和大流行期间DB症状的流行情况。男女的比额表上的指标有很大的差别。使用获得的俄语版NQ,结果显示,在COVID-19大流行的情况下,27.7%未患COVID-19的研究参与者表现出形成的DB症状复合物的迹象,这比大流行前时期的人口指标高出两倍多。女性出现DB整体症状复合体的频率是男性的3倍:31.0% vs 9.1% (p<0.001)。研究结果使我们得出结论,NQ是诊断DB症状严重程度的可靠和有效的工具,在缺乏客观依据的情况下,可以推荐使用NQ作为主诉“呼吸困难”的人的心因性呼吸障碍的明确诊断工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信