目的 对英文版衰弱综合评估工具(CFAI)进行汉化,检验中文版的信、效度。方法 采用Brislin翻译模型对英文版CFAI进行汉化。2015年5月至7月,采用经过文化调试的CFAI及世界卫生组织生活质量简表(WHOQOL-BREF)对石家庄市200名社区老年人进行评定;首次评估1周后,选取其中30名采用CFAI进行第2次评估。6名老年医学专家对CFAI进行内容效度评分,CFAI总分与WHOQOL-BREF总分及两次CFAI评分进行Pearson相关分析,对CFAI进行因子分析,计算CFAI的Cronbach α。结果 汉化CFAI包含4个维度,23个条目;内容效度指数为0.782;因子分析得到6个公因子,累积方差贡献率64.05%;CFAI总分与WHOQOL- BREF总分中度负相关(r=-0.764, P<0.001)。量表总分Cronbach α=0.837,重测相关系数r=0.604~0.941 (P<0.001)。结论 汉化CFAI有较好的信度和效度,可用于我国社区老年人的衰弱评估。
Objective To translate the English version of Comprehensive Frailty Assessment Instrument (CFAI) into Chinese and evaluate its reliability and validity. Methods CFAI was translated into Chinese with the Brislin's translation mode. From May to July, 2015, 200 community aged people in Shijiazhuang, China were assessed with the Chinese version of CFAI and World Health Organization Quality of Life-BREF (WHOQOL-BREF), and 30 of them were assessed with CFAI again after a week. The content validity was rated by six experts of gereology. The total scores of CFAI and WHOQOL-BREF were analyzed with Pearson's correlation, as well as the scores of CFAI test and retest. The CFAI were analyzed with Factor Analysis. The Cronbach's α was tested. Results There were 23 items in 4 dimensions. The content validity index was 0.782. Six factors were extracted by Factor Analysis and the cumulated variance was 64.05%. The total score of CFAI correlated with the score of WHOQOL-BREF (r=-0.764, P<0.001). The Cronbach's α was 0.704~0.897 in dimensions (P<0.001), and the r= 0.604~0.941 (P<0.001) between test and retest. Conclusion The Chinese version of CFAI is reliable and valid, that can be applied to evaluate frailty in community aged people.
[1] 全国老龄工作委员会办公室.王勇在全国老龄委全体会议上强调要清醒认识新形势新任务新要求把老龄事业抓紧抓好[EB/OL]. [2015-04-14]. http://www.cncaprc.gov.cn/contents/2/76810.html.
[2] Clegg A, Young J, Iliffe S, et al. Frailty in elderly people [J]. Lancet, 2013, 381(9868): 752-762.
[3] 陈洁,李婷治. 衰弱症临床诊治研究进展[J]. 中国老年学杂志, 2014, 34(17): 5019-5020.
[4] Sánchez-García S, Sánchez-Arenas R, García-Peña C, et al. Frailty among community-dwelling elderly Mexican people: prevalence and association with sociodemographic characteristics, health state and the use of health services [J]. Geriatr Gerontol Int, 2013, 14(2): 395-402.
[5] Sousa AC, Dias RC, Maciel AC, et al. Frailty syndrome and associated factors in community-dwelling elderly in Northeast Brazil [J]. Arch Gerontol Geriatr, 2012, 54(2): e95-e101.
[6] Song X, Mitnitski A, Rockwoed K. Prevalence and 10 year outcomes of frailty in older adults in relation to deficit accumulation [J]. J Am Geriatr Soc, 2010, 58(4): 681-687.
[7] 奚兴,郭桂芳,孙静. 衰弱的内涵及其概念框架[J]. 实用老年医学, 2013, 27(8): 687-690.
[8] de Witte N, Gobbens R, de Donder L, et al. The comprehensive frailty Assessment instrument: development, validity and reliability [J]. Geriatr Nuts, 2013, 34(4): 274-281.
[9] 林润,陈锦秀,冯木兰,等. 脑卒中失语症患者生活质量量表汉化及信效度测评[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2013, 48(4): 349-351.
[10] 方积乾,郝元涛,万崇华,等. 生存质量测定方法及应用[M]. 北京:北京医科大学出版社, 2000: 228-294.
[11] 全国老龄工作委员会办公室. 未来20年是中国老年人口增长最快时期[EB/OL]. [2012-10-19]. http://www.cncaprc.gov.cn/contents/2/2881.html.
[12] 钱军程,陈育德,饶克勤,等. 中国老年人口失能流行趋势的分析与建议[J]. 中国卫生统计, 2012, 29(1): 6-9.
[13] 王燕秋,韩斌如. 衰弱表型定义对老年人不良结局预警的研究进展[J]. 护理学报, 2015, 22(14): 20-23.
[14] de Witte N, Gobbens R, de Donder L, et al. Validation of the Comprehensive Frailty Assessment Instrument against the Tilburg Frailty Indicator [J]. Eur Geriatr Med, 2013, 4(4): 248-254.
[15] 吴明隆. SPSS统计应用实务[M]. 北京:科学出版杜, 2003: 12.
[16] 安胜利,陈平雁. 量表的信度及其影响因素[J]. 中国临床心理学杂志, 2001, 9(4): 315-318.
[17] 赵海平. 护理研究工具[M]// 赵光红. 护理研究. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2003: 71-84.
