浏览全部资源
扫码关注微信
1.广州中医药大学第一临床医学院 /广州中医药大学第一附属医院耳鼻咽喉头颈外科/广东省中医临床研究院岭南耳鼻 喉病研究所 广州 510405
2.广东祈福医院 广州 510405
Published:15 January 2024,
Received:09 October 2023,
移动端阅览
刘洁恒,刘锦光,刘蓬等.自评式中文版耳鸣残疾量表的临床实用性研究[J].中国听力语言康复科学杂志,2024,22(01):46-50.
LIU Jie-heng,LIU Jin-guang,LIU Peng,et al.Research on the Clinical Utility of the Self-Assessment in Chinese Version of the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory[J].Chinese Scientific Journal of Hearing and Speech Rehabilitation,2024,22(01):46-50.
刘洁恒,刘锦光,刘蓬等.自评式中文版耳鸣残疾量表的临床实用性研究[J].中国听力语言康复科学杂志,2024,22(01):46-50. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-4933.2024.01.013.
LIU Jie-heng,LIU Jin-guang,LIU Peng,et al.Research on the Clinical Utility of the Self-Assessment in Chinese Version of the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory[J].Chinese Scientific Journal of Hearing and Speech Rehabilitation,2024,22(01):46-50. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-4933.2024.01.013.
目的
2
探讨以自评方式填写中文版耳鸣残疾量表(the Chinese version of the tinnitus handicap inventory, THI-C)的可靠性及临床实用性。
方法
2
对以耳鸣为第一主诉的180例患者分别采用患者自评及医评两种方式收集初诊THI-C资料,并以自评方式收集复诊患者的THI-C资料,统计自评及医评THI-C完成率,比较两者得分差异,计算自评与医评的符合率及耗时差异。
结果
2
初诊THI-C医评完成率为98.33%,自评完成率为43.89%,自评与医评符合率为16.38%,自评分(48.71±26.75)显著高于医评分(41.11±21.69,
P
<0.01),自评耗时(3.93±2.44分钟)明显低于医评耗时(7.67±1.81分钟,
P
<0.01)。复诊中,2诊至5诊THI-C完成率分别为49.4%、51.2%、43.5%、46.7%,平均耗时分别为3.44±1.76、2.97±1.62、2.88±1.48、2.42±1.44分钟。
结论
2
以自评方式填写THI-C评估耳鸣严重程度可靠性较低,临床实用性有限。
Objective
2
This study investigated the reliability and clinical utility of the Chinese version of the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI-C) in self-assessment.
Methods
2
Collecting initial THI-C data from 180 patients with tinnitus as their primary complaint using both patient self-assessment and clinician-assessment. Follow-up THI-C data were collected through self-assessment for returning patients. Completion rates
score differences between self-assessment and clinician-assessment
agreement rates
and time consumption differences were compared.
Results
2
It showed a clinician completion rate of 98.33% for initial THI-C assessments
while the self-assessment rate was 43.89%. The self-assessment score (48.71±26.75) was higher than the clinician-assessment score (41.11±21.69
P<
0.01). The time taken for self-assessment (3.93±2.44 minutes) was significantly lower than that for clinician-assessment (7.67±1.81 minutes
P
<
0.01). During follow-up visits
the completion rates of THI-C for the 2nd to 5th visits were 49.4%
51.2%
43.5%
and 46.7%
respectively
with the average time taken were 3.44±1.76
2.97±1.62
2.88±1.48
and 2.42±1.44 minutes
respectively.
Conclusion
2
Self-assessment for evaluating the severity of tinnitus using the THI-C exhibits low reliability and limited clinical utility.
中文版耳鸣残疾量表自评医评可靠性临床实用性
The Chinese version of the tinnitus handicap inventory(THI-C)Self-assessmentClinician-assessmentReliabilityClinical utility
Jarach CM, Lugo A, Scala M, et al. Global Prevalence and Incidence of Tinnitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis[J]. JAMA Neurol, 2022,79(9):888-900.
Baguley D, McFerran D, Hall D. Tinnitus[J]. Lancet, 2013,382(9904):1600-1607.
Trevis KJ, McLachlan NM, Wilson SJ. A systematic review and meta-analysis of psychological functioning in chronic tinnitus[J]. Clinical Psychology Review, 2018,60:62-86.
Hébert S, Canlon B, Hasson D. Emotional exhaustion as a predictor of tinnitus[J]. Psychother Psychosom, 2012,81(5):324-326.
Tunkel DE, Bauer CA, Sun GH, et al. Clinical practice guideline: tinnitus executive summary[J]. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 2014,151(4):533-541.
Cima R, Mazurek B, Haider H, et al. A multidisciplinary European guideline for tinnitus: diagnostics, assessment, and treatment[J]. Hno, 2019,67(1):10-42.
Newman CW, Sandridge SA, Jacobson GP. Assessing outcomes of tinnitus intervention[J]. J Am Acad Audiol, 2014,25(1):76-105.
Meikle MB, Stewart BJ, Griest SE, et al. Tinnitus outcomes assessment[J]. Trends Amplif, 2008,12(3):223-235.
Newman CW, Jacobson GP, Spitzer JB. Development of the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory[J]. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 1996,122(2):143-148.
Newman CW, Sandridge SA, Jacobson GP. Psychometric adequacy of the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) for evaluating treatment outcome[J]. J Am Acad Audiol, 1998,9(2):153-160.
Kam ACS, Cheung APP, Chan PYB, et al. Psychometric properties of the Chinese (Cantonese) Tinnitus Handicap Inventory[J]. Clinical Otolaryngology, 2009,34(4):309-315.
Ghulyan-Bédikian V, Paolino M, Giorgetti-D'Esclercs F, et al. [Psychometric properties of a French adaptation of the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory [J]. Encephale, 2010,36(5):390-396.
Passi S, Ralli G, Capparelli E, et al. The THI questionnaire: psychometric data for reliability and validity of the Italian version[J]. Int Tinnitus J, 2008,14(1):26-33.
Mahmoudian S, Shahmiri E, Rouzbahani M, et al. Persian language version of the "Tinnitus Handicap Inventory": translation, standardization, validity and reliability[J]. Int Tinnitus J, 2011,16(2):93-103.
石秋兰, 卜行宽, 王俊国, 等. 耳鸣致残量表中文版的研译与临床应用[J]. 南京医科大学学报(自然科学版), 2007,27(5):476-479.
孟照莉, 郑芸, 王恺. 推荐一种耳鸣主观评估量表[J]. 听力学及言语疾病杂志, 2007,15(4):325-327.
Meng Z, Zheng Y, Liu S, et al. Reliability and validity of the chinese (mandarin) tinnitus handicap inventory[J]. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol, 2012,5(1):10-16.
Wu D, Zheng Y, Chen Z, et al. Further validation of the Chinese (Mandarin) Tinnitus Handicap Inventory: comparison between patient-reported and clinician-interviewed outcomes[J]. Int J Audiol, 2018,57(6):440-448.
吴迪, 郑芸, 陈知己. 中文版耳鸣残疾量表用于患者自评的适应度评估[J]. 四川大学学报(医学版), 2018,49(06):985-988.
刘蓬, 李明, 王洪田, 等. 原发性耳鸣刍议[J]. 听力学及言语疾病杂志, 2010,18(02):99-101.
Zeman F, Koller M, Figueiredo R, et al. Tinnitus Handicap Inventory for Evaluating Treatment Effects: Which Changes Are Clinically Relevant?[J]. Otolaryngology-head And Neck Surgery, 2011,145(2):282-287.
刘蓬. 耳鸣评价量表的研发思路[J]. 中国听力语言康复科学杂志, 2018,16(05):330-333.
陈知己, 郑芸, 钟萍, 等. 耳鸣评价量表的临床应用价值研究[J]. 听力学及言语疾病杂志, 2017,25(03):242-246.
刘蓬, 徐桂丽, 李明, 等. 耳鸣评价量表的信度与效度研究[J]. 中华耳鼻咽喉头颈外科杂志, 2012,47(09):716-719.
刘蓬, 郑芸. 耳鸣评价量表的临床应用[J]. 中国听力语言康复科学杂志, 2018,16(06):411-415.
0
Views
138
下载量
0
CSCD
Publicity Resources
Related Articles
Related Author
Related Institution