RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN GENERAL HEALTH MEASURED WITH THE SICKNESS IMPACT PROFILE AND RESPIRATORY SYMPTOMS, PHYSIOLOGICAL MEASURES, AND MOOD IN PATIENTS WITH CHRONIC AIR-FLOW LIMITATION
RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN GENERAL HEALTH MEASURED WITH THE SICKNESS IMPACT PROFILE AND RESPIRATORY SYMPTOMS, PHYSIOLOGICAL MEASURES, AND MOOD IN PATIENTS WITH CHRONIC AIR-FLOW LIMITATION
复制标题
DOI：
10.1164/ajrccm/140.6.1538
复制
发表时间：
1989-12-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
LITTLEJOHNS, P
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
JONES, PW;BAVEYSTOCK, CM;LITTLEJOHNS, P
研究人员对 141 名患有慢性气流受限的患者进行了研究，其中使用疾病影响概况 (SIP)、肺活量测定法、运动期间的动脉血氧饱和度和六分钟步行距离来测量一般健康状况之间的关系。此外，患者还完成了医院焦虑和抑郁问卷以及医学研究委员会 (MRC) 支气管炎问卷。他们的平均年龄为 63 岁（范围为 31 至 75 岁），平均 FEV 为 47 .+-。预测正常值的 23 (SD)%。与之前报道的生理紊乱程度较高的患者相比，SIP 评分较低（即患者的总体健康状况更好），但 SIP 中不同类别评分的概况与之前的研究结果相似。步行距离与 SIP 的相关性优于任何肺活量测量或动脉饱和度，并且占 SIP 方差的 41% (p < 0.001)。每天喘息的患者的 SIP 评分明显高于不喘息的患者 (p < 0.005)。在呼吸困难和喘息急性发作期间报告呼吸不正常的患者中，SIP 评分是两次发作之间感觉正常的患者的两倍 (p < 0.0006)。步行距离、抑郁评分和 MRC 呼吸困难评分与 SIP 评分相互独立相关。包含这三个变量的多元回归占 SIP 分数总方差的 62%。年龄、性别和对支气管扩张剂的反应与 SIP 评分不相关。我们得出的结论是，SIP 为慢性气流受限患者群体的总体健康状况提供了有效的衡量标准。
The relationship between general health measured using the Sickness Impact Profile (SIP), lung spirometry, arterial oxygen saturation during exercise, and six-minute walking distance was studied in 141 patients with chronic airflow limitation. In addition the patients completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Questionnaire and the Medical Research Council (MRC) Bronchitis Questionnaire. Their mean age was 63 years (range 31 to 75) and their mean FEV, was 47 .+-. 23 (SD)% of predicted normal. The SIP scores were lower (i.e., the patients had better general health) than in previously reported patients who had greater physiological disturbance, but the profile of the different category scores within the SIP was similar to previous findings. Walking distance correlated with the SIP better than any spirometric measure or arterial saturation and accounted for 41% of the variance in SIP (p < 0.001). The SIP score was considerably higher in patients who wheezed every day compared with those who did not (p < 0.005). In patients who reported that their breathing was not normal between acute attacks of breathlessness and wheeze, the SIP score was twice as high as in those who felt normal between attacks (p < 0.0006). Walking distance, depression score, and MRC dyspnea score correlated with SIP score independently of each other. A multiple regression incorporating these three variables accounted for 62% of the total variance in SIP score. Age, sex, and response to bronchodilator were not correlated with SIP score. We conclude that the SIP provides a valid measure of general health in population of patients with chronic airflow limitation.