CAJ | 학술논문

背景:SF-36量表有良好的信度和效度,适于在欧美人群中进行生活质量评价.目的:探讨健康调查量表SF-36在农村老年人群中应用的信度、效度和可行性.设计:本研究为现况研究,研究对象由两阶段随机抽样得到.单位:中国协和医科大学流行病与卫生统计研究所和一所大学的流行病与卫生统计研究所.对象:本研究于2002-05/2002-07在深圳市宝安区随机抽取6个村,选取6个村内687名老年人作为调查对象.纳入标准:年龄≥60岁、有常住户口者;排除标准:患严重精神及听力障碍者.实际获得有效问卷666份,其中男264名,女402名.方法:由经过培训的访问员用SF-36生活质量测量量表对农村老年人进行面对面访问调查,用可行性、信度和效度来评估SF-36量表.主要观察指标:SF-36量表的分半信度、内部一致性、效标关联效度、构想效度和结构效度.结果:该量表具有良好的内部一致性,8个维度的Cronbach'a系数均≥0.8,除心理健康外,各维度的分半信度较好,Pearson相关系数均≥0.7.构想效度和效标关联效度令人满意.因子分析产生两个因子,能解释总方差的63.14%,且除精神影响外,其它各维度在相应因子有较满意的因子载荷量(≥0.4).结论:SF-36量表基本适用于农村老年人生活质量评价,但部分条目需进行调整.脆弱的老年人群应该给予更多的关怀和帮助.
배경:SF-36량표유량호적신도화효도,괄우재구미인군중진행생활질량평개.목적:탐토건강조사량표SF-36재농촌노년인군중응용적신도、효도화가행성.설계:본연구위현황연구,연구대상유량계단수궤추양득도.단위:중국협화의과대학류행병여위생통계연구소화일소대학적류행병여위생통계연구소.대상:본연구우2002-05/2002-07재심수시보안구수궤추취6개촌,선취6개촌내687명노년인작위조사대상.납입표준:년령≥60세、유상주호구자;배제표준:환엄중정신급은력장애자.실제획득유효문권666빈,기중남264명,녀402명.방법:유경과배훈적방문원용SF-36생활질량측량량표대농촌노년인진행면대면방문조사,용가행성、신도화효도래평고SF-36량표.주요관찰지표:SF-36량표적분반신도、내부일치성、효표관련효도、구상효도화결구효도.결과:해량표구유량호적내부일치성,8개유도적Cronbach'a계수균≥0.8,제심리건강외,각유도적분반신도교호,Pearson상관계수균≥0.7.구상효도화효표관련효도령인만의.인자분석산생량개인자,능해석총방차적63.14%,차제정신영향외,기타각유도재상응인자유교만의적인자재하량(≥0.4).결론:SF-36량표기본괄용우농촌노년인생활질량평개,단부분조목수진행조정.취약적노년인군응해급여경다적관부화방조.
BACKGROUND: Short-form-36 health survey(SF-36) has good reliability and validity, which is applicable to assess quality of life (QOL) in European and American population.OBJECTIVE: To study the reliability, validity and feasibility of SF-36 scale in the rural elder and evaluate their QOL.DESIGN: It is a cross-sectional study, all participants are sampled by two-phase random sampling.SETTING: Institute of Epidemiology and Hygienic Statistics, China Union Medical University and institute of epidemiology and hygienic statistics in a university.PARTICIPANTS: Totally 687 old people were randomly selected from six villages in Bao' an District of Shenzhen from May to July 2002. Inclusion criteria: All the people were residents and aged 60 years or above. Exclusion criteria: People with severe auditory or mental obstacles were excluded. Totally 666 questionnaires were valid, among them 264 were male and 402 were female.METHODS: All participants were interviewed face to face with SF-36 questionnaire by trained investigators. The feasibility, reliability and validity were the main measures of SF-36 scale.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Split-half reliability, internal consistency, criterion-related validity, discriminant validity and construct validity.RESULTS: SF-36 scale had a good internal consistency, and all Cronbach' α coefficients were equal or more than 0. 8 in 8 dimensions. The split-half reliability of every dimension was preferable and Pearson correlation coefficients were 0.7 or higher except mental health(MH) . Discriminant validity and criterion related validity were obtained and satisfied. Two factors were got by factor analysis, which could account for 63.14% of total variance. Every dimension held a moderate loading in its relevant factor except role-emotion (RE) dimension(≥0.4).CONCLUSION: SF-36 scale is applicable for QOL assessment in the rural elder after some item revisions. The vulnerable elder should be given more attention and care.