【摘要】：目的引入死亡與瀕死焦慮量表(Death and Dying Distress Scale,DADDS)通過翻譯、綜合、回譯、專家內(nèi)容效度評(píng)價(jià)及信效度檢驗(yàn)等對(duì)量表進(jìn)行跨文化調(diào)試,形成中文版DADDS量表,并在晚期癌癥患者中進(jìn)行初步應(yīng)用。方法經(jīng)量表原作者Lo.C同意后,根據(jù)跨文化調(diào)適過程的指南,對(duì)量表進(jìn)行正向翻譯、綜合、回譯、專家評(píng)議、預(yù)調(diào)查,形成中文版量表,第一階段預(yù)試驗(yàn)采用便利抽樣法在安徽省某三甲腫瘤�？漆t(yī)院獲取目的抽樣抽取30名晚期癌癥患者進(jìn)行中文版DADDS量表的預(yù)實(shí)驗(yàn),形成中文版DADDS量表臨床施測(cè)版本,并與2016年6月-2016年11月,采用中文版DADDS臨床施測(cè)版本對(duì)134例晚期癌癥患者進(jìn)行信效度檢驗(yàn),采用項(xiàng)目分析法對(duì)量表?xiàng)l目進(jìn)行評(píng)價(jià),采用專家法來(lái)評(píng)價(jià)內(nèi)容效度、主成分因子分析和平行分析法評(píng)價(jià)結(jié)構(gòu)效度。第二階段,采用中文版DADDS在108例晚期癌癥患者群體中初步應(yīng)用。結(jié)果(1)中文版量表各條目CVI值為0.875~1.000之間,S-CVI/Ave為0.983;(2)極端組法評(píng)估條目鑒別度顯示,各條目高低兩組得分均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)差異(P0.05),表明條目具有較好的鑒別度;(3)結(jié)構(gòu)效度應(yīng)用探索性因子分析,結(jié)果顯示特征值大于1的因子數(shù)目為2個(gè),累積方差貢獻(xiàn)率為72.331%;經(jīng)最大正交旋轉(zhuǎn)后因子載荷矩陣發(fā)現(xiàn)條目4、6、7、8、9、11出現(xiàn)因子橫跨的現(xiàn)象。經(jīng)平行分析結(jié)果顯示因子數(shù)為1時(shí),實(shí)際觀察數(shù)據(jù)特征值大于隨機(jī)數(shù)據(jù)平均特征值,所以因子數(shù)為1時(shí)為最佳量表因子個(gè)數(shù)。本研究采用固定單因子提取,當(dāng)原量表的因子個(gè)數(shù)為1時(shí),特征值為9.704,方差貢獻(xiàn)率64.694%,條目的載荷量0.731-0.857。(4)內(nèi)部一致性信度克朗巴赫α系數(shù)為0.960,分半信度Spearman-Brown系數(shù)為0.898,重測(cè)信度0.810。(5)晚期癌癥患者死亡焦慮總體得分為40.68±16.74(0-69)。中文版DADDS量表得分最高的前兩位分別是:條目8、條目9。(6)單因素分析結(jié)果顯示,不同性別、不同婚姻狀況及有無(wú)宗教信仰的晚期癌癥患者死亡焦慮水平差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義,P0.05。將單因素分析中對(duì)死亡焦慮總分有影響的3個(gè)變量作為自變量,進(jìn)行多元逐步線性回歸分析。自變量性別、婚姻狀況、宗教信仰進(jìn)入回歸模型,對(duì)因變量死亡焦慮水平有顯著性影響,P值分別為0.002、0.027和0.035。結(jié)論中文版DADDS量表信度、效度較好,適用于我國(guó)晚期癌癥患者死亡焦慮的評(píng)估。
[Abstract]:Objective to introduce the death and near death anxiety scale (Death and Dying Distress Scale,DADDS) into the Chinese version of DADDS scale by means of translation, synthesis, back translation, expert content validity evaluation and reliability and validity test. And to carry on the preliminary application in the advanced cancer patient. Methods with the consent of Lo.C, the original author of the scale, according to the guide of cross-cultural adjustment process, the scale was translated positively, synthesized, translated back, reviewed by experts, pre-investigated, and the Chinese version of the scale was formed. In the first stage of the pre-trial, 30 patients with advanced cancer were selected by convenient sampling method in a third Class Cancer Hospital in Anhui Province to form the clinical version of the Chinese version of the DADDS scale. From June 2016 to November 2016, the reliability and validity of 134patients with advanced cancer were tested by Chinese version of DADDS clinical test, the items of the scale were evaluated by item analysis, and the content validity was evaluated by expert method. Principal component factor analysis and parallel analysis were used to evaluate the structural validity. In the second stage, the Chinese version of DADDS was used in 108 patients with advanced cancer. Results (1) the CVI value of each item of the Chinese version of the scale was 0.875 鈮，

本文編號(hào)：2495836