比较轴型颈椎炎患者疼痛和僵硬测量工具的结构效度:OASIS队列的横断面分析。

IF 5.1 2区 医学 Q1 RHEUMATOLOGY
Dafne Capelusnik, Elena Nikiphorou, Annelies Boonen, Robin Christensen, Désirée van der Heijde, Robert Landewé, Astrid van Tubergen, Sofia Ramiro
{"title":"比较轴型颈椎炎患者疼痛和僵硬测量工具的结构效度:OASIS队列的横断面分析。","authors":"Dafne Capelusnik, Elena Nikiphorou, Annelies Boonen, Robin Christensen, Désirée van der Heijde, Robert Landewé, Astrid van Tubergen, Sofia Ramiro","doi":"10.1136/rmdopen-2024-004775","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare the construct validity, including discrimination between known groups, of three pain and three morning stiffness (MS) measurement instruments.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with radiographic axial spondyloarthritis with 8-year data from the Outcome in Ankylosing Spondylitis International Study cohort were assessed cross-sectionally. Three instruments for pain and three for MS, all self-reported and scored 0-10, were compared. Construct validity was evaluated by testing (1) hypothesis of correlations' strength and (2) discrimination between known groups using standardised mean differences (SMD) across external constructs. Influence of contextual factors (CFs) on SMDs was investigated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 85 patients, mean age was 54 (SD 11), mean symptom duration 31 (11) years, 71% males. All six instruments showed a good construct validity by fulfilling >75% of the hypotheses for the strength of correlation. Neck/back/hip pain (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index-Question 2, BASDAI-Q2) and total back pain had higher SMDs compared with back pain at night across all between-group comparisons, with BASDAI-Q2 performing mostly slightly better (eg, SMD for external construct Axial Spondyloarthritis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS; ≥2.1 vs <2.1): 1.87 (BASDAI-Q2) vs 1.56 (total back pain) vs 1.07 (back pain at night)). MS-severity and severity/duration had higher SMDs across all external constructs (with MS-severity slightly better), while MS-duration performed worse (eg, SMD external construct ASDAS: 1.51 (MS-severity) and 1.39 (MS-severity/duration) vs 1.16 (MS-duration)). Influence of CFs on known group discrimination was limited.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The recommended Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society Core Outcome Set (ASAS-COS) pain measurement instrument total back pain BASDAI-Q2 has the best known group discrimination. For MS, the ASAS-COS stiffness measure (MS-severity/duration) performs well although MS-severity even slightly better. Known group discrimination is overall stable across CFs.</p>","PeriodicalId":21396,"journal":{"name":"RMD Open","volume":"10 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11647358/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparing the construct validity of measurement instruments for pain and stiffness in patients with axial spondyloartwhritis: cross-sectional analysis in the OASIS cohort.\",\"authors\":\"Dafne Capelusnik, Elena Nikiphorou, Annelies Boonen, Robin Christensen, Désirée van der Heijde, Robert Landewé, Astrid van Tubergen, Sofia Ramiro\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/rmdopen-2024-004775\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare the construct validity, including discrimination between known groups, of three pain and three morning stiffness (MS) measurement instruments.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with radiographic axial spondyloarthritis with 8-year data from the Outcome in Ankylosing Spondylitis International Study cohort were assessed cross-sectionally. Three instruments for pain and three for MS, all self-reported and scored 0-10, were compared. Construct validity was evaluated by testing (1) hypothesis of correlations' strength and (2) discrimination between known groups using standardised mean differences (SMD) across external constructs. Influence of contextual factors (CFs) on SMDs was investigated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 85 patients, mean age was 54 (SD 11), mean symptom duration 31 (11) years, 71% males. All six instruments showed a good construct validity by fulfilling >75% of the hypotheses for the strength of correlation. Neck/back/hip pain (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index-Question 2, BASDAI-Q2) and total back pain had higher SMDs compared with back pain at night across all between-group comparisons, with BASDAI-Q2 performing mostly slightly better (eg, SMD for external construct Axial Spondyloarthritis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS; ≥2.1 vs <2.1): 1.87 (BASDAI-Q2) vs 1.56 (total back pain) vs 1.07 (back pain at night)). MS-severity and severity/duration had higher SMDs across all external constructs (with MS-severity slightly better), while MS-duration performed worse (eg, SMD external construct ASDAS: 1.51 (MS-severity) and 1.39 (MS-severity/duration) vs 1.16 (MS-duration)). Influence of CFs on known group discrimination was limited.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The recommended Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society Core Outcome Set (ASAS-COS) pain measurement instrument total back pain BASDAI-Q2 has the best known group discrimination. For MS, the ASAS-COS stiffness measure (MS-severity/duration) performs well although MS-severity even slightly better. Known group discrimination is overall stable across CFs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21396,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"RMD Open\",\"volume\":\"10 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11647358/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"RMD Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/rmdopen-2024-004775\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RHEUMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RMD Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/rmdopen-2024-004775","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较三种疼痛和晨僵(MS)测量工具的构念效度,包括已知组间的区别。方法:对来自强直性脊柱炎结局国际研究队列的8年影像学资料的轴型脊柱炎患者进行横断面评估。三种疼痛量表和三种多发性硬化症量表进行比较,均为自我报告,评分为0-10分。构念效度通过检验(1)相关强度假设和(2)使用外部构念的标准化平均差异(SMD)检验已知群体之间的区别来评估。研究了环境因素对smd的影响。结果:85例患者,平均年龄54岁(SD 11),平均症状持续时间31(11)年,男性占71%。所有六个工具都显示出良好的结构效度,满足了bb0 - 75%的相关强度假设。在所有组间比较中,颈/背/髋疼痛(浴缸强直性脊柱炎疾病活动指数-问题2,BASDAI-Q2)和总背部疼痛的SMD均高于夜间背部疼痛,BASDAI-Q2的表现大多略好(例如,外部构造轴向性脊柱炎疾病活动评分(ASDAS;≥2.1 vs结论:推荐的国际脊椎关节炎评估学会核心结局集(ASAS-COS)疼痛测量仪器BASDAI-Q2具有最著名的群体歧视。对于多发性硬化症,ASAS-COS刚度测量(多发性硬化症严重性/持续时间)表现良好,尽管多发性硬化症严重性甚至略好。已知群体歧视总体上稳定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparing the construct validity of measurement instruments for pain and stiffness in patients with axial spondyloartwhritis: cross-sectional analysis in the OASIS cohort.

Objectives: To compare the construct validity, including discrimination between known groups, of three pain and three morning stiffness (MS) measurement instruments.

Methods: Patients with radiographic axial spondyloarthritis with 8-year data from the Outcome in Ankylosing Spondylitis International Study cohort were assessed cross-sectionally. Three instruments for pain and three for MS, all self-reported and scored 0-10, were compared. Construct validity was evaluated by testing (1) hypothesis of correlations' strength and (2) discrimination between known groups using standardised mean differences (SMD) across external constructs. Influence of contextual factors (CFs) on SMDs was investigated.

Results: Of 85 patients, mean age was 54 (SD 11), mean symptom duration 31 (11) years, 71% males. All six instruments showed a good construct validity by fulfilling >75% of the hypotheses for the strength of correlation. Neck/back/hip pain (Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index-Question 2, BASDAI-Q2) and total back pain had higher SMDs compared with back pain at night across all between-group comparisons, with BASDAI-Q2 performing mostly slightly better (eg, SMD for external construct Axial Spondyloarthritis Disease Activity Score (ASDAS; ≥2.1 vs <2.1): 1.87 (BASDAI-Q2) vs 1.56 (total back pain) vs 1.07 (back pain at night)). MS-severity and severity/duration had higher SMDs across all external constructs (with MS-severity slightly better), while MS-duration performed worse (eg, SMD external construct ASDAS: 1.51 (MS-severity) and 1.39 (MS-severity/duration) vs 1.16 (MS-duration)). Influence of CFs on known group discrimination was limited.

Conclusions: The recommended Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society Core Outcome Set (ASAS-COS) pain measurement instrument total back pain BASDAI-Q2 has the best known group discrimination. For MS, the ASAS-COS stiffness measure (MS-severity/duration) performs well although MS-severity even slightly better. Known group discrimination is overall stable across CFs.

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
RMD Open
RMD Open RHEUMATOLOGY-
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
6.50%
发文量
205
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: RMD Open publishes high quality peer-reviewed original research covering the full spectrum of musculoskeletal disorders, rheumatism and connective tissue diseases, including osteoporosis, spine and rehabilitation. Clinical and epidemiological research, basic and translational medicine, interesting clinical cases, and smaller studies that add to the literature are all considered.
×
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