■本研究旨在评估心血管疾病患者食管恐惧症评估工具的测量特性和方法学质量,为医疗保健专业人员选择高质量的评估工具提供参考。
■对特定数据库进行了系统搜索:Embase,Cochrane图书馆,PubMed,WebofScience,中国国家知识基础设施,万方数据库,中国生物医药圆盘,CINAHL,和中国科技期刊数据库,从成立到2023年4月1日。研究人员检索了心血管疾病患者运动恐惧量表测量属性的研究。他们还追溯了纳入研究的参考文献,以补充相关文献。根据纳入和排除标准,筛选和数据提取由两名评审员独立进行.两名研究人员分别使用基于共识的健康测量仪器选择标准(COSMIN)偏差风险清单来评估量表的方法学质量,应用COSMIN标准来评估秤的测量特性,并使用了修改后的分级,Recommendations,评估,发展,和评估系统,以评估证据的确定性。
■确定了17项研究,这些研究报告了6种患者报告的结果测量工具(包括不同的语言版本)的心理测量特性。仅在两项研究中,内容有效性的方法学质量就足够了。其余患者报告的结局指标显示出值得怀疑的内容有效性.关于跨文化有效性/测量不变性的信息有限,测量误差,并检索了响应性。瑞典版和中文版的坦帕恐惧症心脏量表被分级为“A”。\"其余仪器被分级\"B.\"
■关于运动恐惧症心脏的坦帕量表的瑞典语和中文版本的方法和测量属性相对较高,可以暂时推荐。其余标尺的测量特性仍有待验证。
UNASSIGNED: This study aimed to evaluate the measurement properties and methodological quality of assessment tools for Kinesophobia among patients with cardiovascular disease and provide a reference for healthcare professionals in selecting high-quality assessment tools.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic search was performed on specific databases: Embase, the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science,
China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang database,
China Biological Medicine disc, CINAHL, and
China Science and Technology Journal Database, from inception to April 1, 2023. The researchers retrieved studies on the measurement attributes of the exercise fear scale in patients with cardiovascular diseases. They also traced back the references of the included studies to supplement relevant literature. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, screening and data extraction were independently undertaken by two reviewers. Two researchers individually used the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) Risk of Bias Checklist to assess the methodological quality of the scale, applied the COSMIN criteria to evaluate the measurement properties of the scale, and used a modified Grading, Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system to assess the certainty of evidence.
UNASSIGNED: Seventeen studies were identified that reported the psychometric properties of six patient reported outcome measurement tools (included different languages version) The methodological quality of content validity was adequate in only two studies, the remaining patient-reported outcome measures demonstrated doubtful content validity. Limited information on cross-cultural validity/measurement invariance, measurement error, and responsiveness was retrieved. The Swedish version and the Chinese version of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia Heart were graded \"A.\" The remaining instruments were graded \"B.\"
UNASSIGNED: The methodological and measurement attributes of the Swedish and Chinese versions of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia Heart are relatively high quality and can be tentatively recommended. The measurement properties of the remaining scales remain to be verified.