VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF THE CONSTIPATION ASSESSMENT SCALE
VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF THE CONSTIPATION ASSESSMENT SCALE
复制标题
DOI：
10.1097/00002820-198906000-00012
复制
发表时间：
1989-06-01
期刊：
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
WILLIAMS, FA
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
MCMILLAN, SC;WILLIAMS, FA
便秘是接受神经毒性化疗药物、麻醉性镇痛药、抗抑郁药、镇定剂和肌肉松弛剂的患者的一个重要问题。随着急症护理越来越多地进入社区，护士将需要有效可靠的方法来评估癌症患者的便秘。本研究的目的是研究便秘评估量表的效度和信度，这是一种评估便秘存在和严重程度的新工具。样本由两组组成：对照组有32名工作的成年人，而患者组有32名因使用长春花生物碱或吗啡治疗而有便秘风险的成年人。同意的受试者被要求完成便秘评估量表（CAS）。两组之间症状强度的显著差异（t= 6.32, p< 0.0001）表明CAS能够区分有便秘和没有便秘的受试者，从而为量表的构建效度提供证据。进一步分析患者组（吗啡组与长春花生物碱组）两亚组症状强度评分差异有统计学意义（t= 2.54, p< 0.01）。后一项发现支持CAS区分中度和重度症状强度的能力。受试者在2分钟内完成CAS。为了研究量表的重测信度，我们要求16名表面健康的工作成年人两次填写CAS，每次延迟1小时。两组得分相关（r= 0.98）。这种高度正相关提供了可靠性的证据。此外，使用alpha系数对患者组的评分进行内部一致性研究。结果alpha（0.70）是可以接受的。研究结果令人鼓舞，但需要对该工具进行进一步研究。护士需要这样有效可靠的评估工具，并且在临床环境中快速方便地使用。
Constipation is a significant problem in patients receiving neurotoxic chemotherapeutic agents, narcotic analgesics, antidepressants, tranquilizers, and muscle relaxants. Increasingly, as acute care moves into the community, nurses will need valid and reliable methods of assessing constipation in individuals with cancer. The purpose of this project was to study the validity and reliability of the Constipation Assessment Scale, a new tool designed to assess the presence and severity of constipation. The sample consisted of two groups: a control group of 32 working adults and a patient group of 32 adults at risk for constipation because of treatment with Vinca alkaloids or morphine. Consenting subjects were asked to complete the eight-item Constipation Assessment Scale (CAS). A significant difference in intensity of symptoms between the two groups (t= 6.32, p< 0.0001) demonstrates the ability of the CAS to differentiate between subjects with and without constipation and thus provides evidence of construct validity of the scale. Further analysis of scores of the two subgroups in the patient group (subjects receiving morphine vs. Vinca alkaloids) revealed a significant difference (t= 2.54, p< 0.01) in symptom intensity. This latter finding supports the ability of the CAS to differentiate between moderate and severe symptom intensity. Subjects completed the CAS in∼ 2 min. To study the test-retest reliability of the scale, a group of 16 apparently healthy working adults were asked to fill out the CAS twice with a 1-h delay. The two sets of scores were correlated (r= 0.98). This high positive correlation provides evidence of reliability. In addition, scores of the patient group were studied for internal consistency using an alpha coefficient. The resulting alpha (0.70) was acceptable. Study results are encouraging, but further study of the tool is needed. Nurses need assessment tools such as this that are valid and reliable, and that are quick and easy to use in the clinical setting.