Zung氏焦虑抑郁量表测评心血管内科住院患者的适用性分析

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-3110.2017.08.004

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF (484 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要目的探讨Zung氏焦虑自评量表和抑郁自评量表测评心血管病住院患者的适用性。方法采用问卷对209例住院患者进行一般资料、焦虑和抑郁自评量表的调查,利用项目分析、相关分析、信度分析探讨两量表的适用性。结果调查对象中焦虑和抑郁的发生率分别为27.3%和34.0%。焦虑自评量表和抑郁自评量表的Cronbach’s α系数分别为0.803和0.814。焦虑自评量表中有4个条目与总标准分相关性低(r<0.4),抑郁自评量表中有8项条目与总标准分相关性低(r<0.4)。两个量表中分别有2项条目删除后Cronbach’s α系数增大。结论虽两个自评量表操作简便、易于掌握并被广泛应用,但本研究结果却证实两个自评量表对心血管病住院患者的焦虑和抑郁心理评估的适用性较差,应不用或慎用。

	服务

	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	张娇
	闫城
	黄芳

关键词 ： Zung氏焦虑, 抑郁, 量表, 心血管病, 适用性

Abstract：Objective To explore the applicability of Zung’s Self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) and Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS) in evaluating hospitalized patients in department of cardiovascular medicine. Methods We investigated 209 inpatients with cardiovascular disease by general information scale, SAS and SDS. The applicability of SAS and SDS was explored by item analysis, correlation analysis and reliability analysis. Results The morbidities of anxiety and depression were 27.3% and 34.0% respectively. The Cronbach’s α coefficients of SAS and SDS were 0.803 and 0.814 respectively. Four entries in SAS and eight entries in SDS were poorly correlated with the total standard score (r<0.4). The Cronbach’s α coefficient was increased after two entries in SAS or in SDS were left out. Conclusions Although SAS and SDS are simple, easy to grasp and widely used, their applicability in assessing anxiety and depression of inpatients with cardiovascular disease is poor. Therefore, they should be left off or used with caution.

Key words： Zung's Self-Rating Anxiety Scale cardiovascular disease applicability

收稿日期: 2017-02-21

R395.6

引用本文:

张娇, 闫城, 黄芳. Zung氏焦虑抑郁量表测评心血管内科住院患者的适用性分析[J]. 实用预防医学, 2017, 24(8): 909-912. ZHANG Jiao, YAN Cheng, HUANG Fang. Applicability of Zung’s Self-Rating Anxiety Scale in evaluating inpatients in department of cardiovascular medicine. , 2017, 24(8): 909-912.

链接本文:

https://www.syyfyx.com/CN/10.3969/j.issn.1006-3110.2017.08.004 或 https://www.syyfyx.com/CN/Y2017/V24/I8/909

[1] 刘春萍, 崔振双, 李俊峡, 等. 心内科门诊慢性病患者失眠及焦虑抑郁情况调查[J]. 中国循证心血管医学杂志, 2016,9(5):605-606.
[2] 苏茜, 刘玉萍, 程幼夫, 等. 医院焦虑抑郁量表在健康体检中心应用的信度和效度研究[J]. 四川医学, 2012,33(1):174-176.
[3] 王征宇, 迟玉芬. 焦虑自评量表(SAS)[J]. 上海精神医学, 1984,16(1):73-74.
[4] 余晓燕, 曹淑殷, 李君琴, 等. SAS与SDS在胎儿异常引产孕妇中的适用性研究[J]. 护理与康复, 2016,15(8):723-727.
[5] Balasubramaniyan N. Evaluation of anxiety induced cardiovascular response in known hypertensive patients undergoing exodontia-a prospective study[J]. J Clin Diagn Res, 2016,10(8):ZC123-ZC127.
[6] Cohen BE, Edmondson D, Kronish IM. State of the art review: depression, stress, anxiety, and cardiovascular disease[J]. Am J Hypertens, 2015,28(11):1295-1302.
[7] Małyszczak K, Rymaszewska J. Depression and anxiety in cardiovascular disease[J]. Kardiol Pol, 2016,74(7):603-609.
[8] 王春芳, 蔡则环, 徐清. 抑郁自评量表—SDS对1 340例正常人评定分析[J]. 中国神经精神疾病杂志, 1986,12(5):267-268.
[9] Jegede RO. Psychometric characteristics of Yoruba versions of Zung's self-rating depression scale and self-rating anxiety scale[J]. Afr J Med Med Sci, 1979,8(3-4):133-137.
[10] Li H, Jin D, Qiao F, et al. Relationship between the Self-Rating Anxiety Scale score and the success rate of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography[J].Intemational J Psych Med, 2015,51(1):47-55.
[11] Lindsay WR, Michie AM. Adaptation of the Zung self-rating anxiety scale for people with a mental handicap[J]. J Ment Defic Res, 1988,32(6):485-490.
[12] Olatunji BO, Deacon BJ, Abramowitz JS, et al. Dimensionality of somatic complaints: factor structure and psychometric properties of the Self-Rating Anxiety Scale[J]. J Anxiety Disord, 2006,20(5):543-561.
[13] 陈慧芳, 丁卫亚, 郑倩倩. 心理干预对于晚期癌症患者生存质量、焦虑抑郁和社会支持的影响[J]. 实用预防医学, 2014,21(4):447-449.
[14] 高聪颖, 吴锦秀, 周雪微, 等. 焦虑抑郁型消化内科患者临床健康教育的效果研究[J]. 实用预防医学, 2014,21(12):1531-1533.