摘要
目的:对比骨关节炎中医证候量化标准积分与WOMAC骨关节炎指数的信度与一致性。方法:将120例膝骨关节炎患者进行中医辨证分组,分别给予骨痹通方加减。同一组患者分别在初诊、治疗4周后采用OA中医证候量化标准积分及WOMAC骨关节炎指数进行评估,并对2种评价方法进行比较。结果:OA中医证候量化标准积分的重测相关系数r为0.912~0.980,WOMAC骨关节炎指数的重测相关系数r为0.927~0.985。内部一致性信度OA中医证候量化标准积分的克朗巴赫系数α为0.875~0.926,WOMAC骨关节炎指数的克朗巴赫系数α为0.881~0.938。2种积分评价在治疗前与治疗后均呈显著正相关(P<0.01)。结论:膝骨关节炎中医证候量化标准积分的信度与WOMAC骨关节炎指数相当,具有良好的一致性。中医证候量化标准积分更适用于膝骨关节炎中医证候方面的评估,值得临床推广应用。
Objective：To compare the reliability and consistency between TCM syndrome quantification stan- dard and The Western Onstario and McMaster Universities （WOMAC）index of osteoarthritis.nethods：Patients of 120 cases were divided into several groups by TCM syndrome differentiation.The patients in the same group were evaluated by traditional Chinese medicine syndrome quantification standard score and WOMAC os- teoarthritis index at the time of diagnosis and four weeks after therapy.Then we compared the results of these two kinds of evaluation methods.Resuits：OA quantization standard integral retest correlation coefficient r was between 0.912-0.980 and WOMAC osteoarthritis index was between 0.927-0.985.The Krone Bach coefficient of internal consistency reliability OA quantized standard integral was between 0.875-0.926,WOMAC os- teoarthritis index was between 0.881-0.938.These two kinds of integral evaluation before and after treatment showed significant positive correlation （P〈0.01）.Conclusion：The reliability of the TCM syndrome quantification standard of knee osteoarthritis is similar to that of the WOMAC osteoarthritis index,and has good consistency. The evaluation of TCM syndrome quantitative integral standard is more suitable for knee osteoarthritis TCM syndrome, worthy of clinical application.
出处
《中日友好医院学报》
2017年第3期145-148,共4页
Journal of China-Japan Friendship Hospital
基金
北京市中医药科技项目JJ2011-89
北京市自然科学基金7132222
关键词
骨关节炎
疗效评估
中医证候量化标准
osteoarthritis
efficacy evaluation
quantized standards of TCM syndromes
