慢性中风患者两种多方面疲劳评估问卷的最小临床意义差异。

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION
Soheila Fallah, Zahra Parnain, Parvaneh Taghavi-Azar-Sharabiani, Moslem Cheraghifard, Behnoosh Vasaghi-Gharamaleki, Mahtab Roohi-Azizi, Mansoureh Hashemi, Mahin Yousefi, Mohammad-Taghi Joghataei, Ghorban Taghizadeh
{"title":"慢性中风患者两种多方面疲劳评估问卷的最小临床意义差异。","authors":"Soheila Fallah, Zahra Parnain, Parvaneh Taghavi-Azar-Sharabiani, Moslem Cheraghifard, Behnoosh Vasaghi-Gharamaleki, Mahtab Roohi-Azizi, Mansoureh Hashemi, Mahin Yousefi, Mohammad-Taghi Joghataei, Ghorban Taghizadeh","doi":"10.1080/10749357.2024.2408997","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This research sought to ascertain the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) and Robust Clinically Important Difference (RCID) of the Multidimensional Fatigue Symptom Inventory-Short Form (MFSI-SF) and Chalder Fatigue Questionnaire-11 (CFQ-11) as two important concepts for the clinical interpretation of the results in chronic post-stroke population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 128 subjects with chronic post-stroke completed the MFSI-SF and CFQ-11 before and after six weeks of intervention. The MCIDs were derived using both anchor- and distribution-based methods; however, only anchor-based methods were used to estimate RCIDs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Anchor-based MCIDs for MFSI-SF and CFQ-11 were in the range of -5 to -6.28 and -2 to -4.56, respectively. Distribution-based MCIDs in MFSI-SF and CFQ-11 were calculated in the range of -4.17 to -24.05 and -1.72 to -7.68, respectively. RCID ranges of -10 to -15 were obtained for the MFSI-SF and -6 to -7.33 for the CFQ-11.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings may have implications for clinical experts in the clinical interpretation of fatigue changes observed in MFSI-SF and CFQ-11 in individuals with chronic stroke.</p>","PeriodicalId":23164,"journal":{"name":"Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"1-14"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The minimal clinically important difference of two multifaceted fatigue evaluation questionnaires in chronic stroke.\",\"authors\":\"Soheila Fallah, Zahra Parnain, Parvaneh Taghavi-Azar-Sharabiani, Moslem Cheraghifard, Behnoosh Vasaghi-Gharamaleki, Mahtab Roohi-Azizi, Mansoureh Hashemi, Mahin Yousefi, Mohammad-Taghi Joghataei, Ghorban Taghizadeh\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10749357.2024.2408997\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This research sought to ascertain the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) and Robust Clinically Important Difference (RCID) of the Multidimensional Fatigue Symptom Inventory-Short Form (MFSI-SF) and Chalder Fatigue Questionnaire-11 (CFQ-11) as two important concepts for the clinical interpretation of the results in chronic post-stroke population.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 128 subjects with chronic post-stroke completed the MFSI-SF and CFQ-11 before and after six weeks of intervention. The MCIDs were derived using both anchor- and distribution-based methods; however, only anchor-based methods were used to estimate RCIDs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Anchor-based MCIDs for MFSI-SF and CFQ-11 were in the range of -5 to -6.28 and -2 to -4.56, respectively. Distribution-based MCIDs in MFSI-SF and CFQ-11 were calculated in the range of -4.17 to -24.05 and -1.72 to -7.68, respectively. RCID ranges of -10 to -15 were obtained for the MFSI-SF and -6 to -7.33 for the CFQ-11.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings may have implications for clinical experts in the clinical interpretation of fatigue changes observed in MFSI-SF and CFQ-11 in individuals with chronic stroke.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23164,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-14\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10749357.2024.2408997\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10749357.2024.2408997","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在确定多维疲劳症状量表-简表(MFSI-SF)和查尔德疲劳问卷-11(CFQ-11)的最小临床重要差异(MCID)和稳健临床重要差异(RCID),这是临床解释慢性脑卒中后人群研究结果的两个重要概念:方法: 共有 128 名慢性中风后受试者在六周干预前后完成了 MFSI-SF 和 CFQ-11。采用锚定法和分布法得出MCID,但仅采用锚定法估算RCID:结果:MFSI-SF和CFQ-11的锚定MCID分别为-5至-6.28和-2至-4.56。MFSI-SF和CFQ-11基于分布的MCID分别为-4.17至-24.05和-1.72至-7.68。MFSI-SF的RCID范围为-10至-15,CFQ-11的RCID范围为-6至-7.33:这些发现可能对临床专家解释慢性卒中患者在 MFSI-SF 和 CFQ-11 中观察到的疲劳变化有一定意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The minimal clinically important difference of two multifaceted fatigue evaluation questionnaires in chronic stroke.

Purpose: This research sought to ascertain the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) and Robust Clinically Important Difference (RCID) of the Multidimensional Fatigue Symptom Inventory-Short Form (MFSI-SF) and Chalder Fatigue Questionnaire-11 (CFQ-11) as two important concepts for the clinical interpretation of the results in chronic post-stroke population.

Methods: A total of 128 subjects with chronic post-stroke completed the MFSI-SF and CFQ-11 before and after six weeks of intervention. The MCIDs were derived using both anchor- and distribution-based methods; however, only anchor-based methods were used to estimate RCIDs.

Results: Anchor-based MCIDs for MFSI-SF and CFQ-11 were in the range of -5 to -6.28 and -2 to -4.56, respectively. Distribution-based MCIDs in MFSI-SF and CFQ-11 were calculated in the range of -4.17 to -24.05 and -1.72 to -7.68, respectively. RCID ranges of -10 to -15 were obtained for the MFSI-SF and -6 to -7.33 for the CFQ-11.

Conclusion: These findings may have implications for clinical experts in the clinical interpretation of fatigue changes observed in MFSI-SF and CFQ-11 in individuals with chronic stroke.

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
Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation
Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation 医学-康复医学
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
4.50%
发文量
57
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation is the leading journal devoted to the study and dissemination of interdisciplinary, evidence-based, clinical information related to stroke rehabilitation. The journal’s scope covers physical medicine and rehabilitation, neurology, neurorehabilitation, neural engineering and therapeutics, neuropsychology and cognition, optimization of the rehabilitation system, robotics and biomechanics, pain management, nursing, physical therapy, cardiopulmonary fitness, mobility, occupational therapy, speech pathology and communication. There is a particular focus on stroke recovery, improving rehabilitation outcomes, quality of life, activities of daily living, motor control, family and care givers, and community issues. The journal reviews and reports clinical practices, clinical trials, state-of-the-art concepts, and new developments in stroke research and patient care. Both primary research papers, reviews of existing literature, and invited editorials, are included. Sharply-focused, single-issue topics, and the latest in clinical research, provide in-depth knowledge.
×
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