대한한방내과학회지 (The Journal of Internal Korean Medicine)

대한한방내과학회 (The Society of Internal Korean Medicine)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

전신성 활동불능증(Systemic Exertion Intolerance Disease) 진단 기준을 바탕으로 한 만성 피로 증후군(Chronic Fatigue Syndrome) 진단 설문지 개발 및 신뢰도 평가

Development and Validation of Questionnaire for Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) Diagnosis Based on Systemic Exertion Intolerance Disease (SEID) Criteria

  • 임은진 (대전대학교 한의학과, 동서생명과학연구원) ;
  • 손창규 (대전대학교 한의학과, 동서생명과학연구원) ;
  • 장은수 (대전대학교 한의학과, 동서생명과학연구원)
  • Lim, Eun-jin (Institute of Bioscience and Integrative Medicine, Dept. of Oriental Medicine College, University of Daejeon) ;
  • Son, Chang-gue (Institute of Bioscience and Integrative Medicine, Dept. of Oriental Medicine College, University of Daejeon) ;
  • Jang, Eun-su (Institute of Bioscience and Integrative Medicine, Dept. of Oriental Medicine College, University of Daejeon)
  • 투고 : 2020.03.12
  • 심사 : 2020.06.29
  • 발행 : 2020.06.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Purpose: This study aimed to develop a questionnaire for the diagnosis of chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) designed based on the systematic exertion intolerance disorder (SEID) criteria, and to validate the reliability of the questionnaire. Methods: A literature search on questionnaires for CFS diagnosis was conducted to develop a SEID questionnaire (SEID-Q27), followed by a pilot survey to identify the reliability of the questionnaire. Adults (Daejeon university personnel) with a Chalder fatigue scale (CFQ) score ≥15 were invited for the survey. We commenced the survey in November 2019 with a two weeks of interval for the test and retest method. The reliability of the questionnaire was investigated in three angles: 1. Cronbach's α, 2. correlations (r) of the questions, numerical rating scale (NRS), and visual analog scale (VAS), and 3. kappa (k) analysis. Results: Among the total 275 adults registered, 55 (20%) participants with a CFQ score ≥15 were invited, and 31 (11%) [15 male, 16 female] completed the questionnaire. The total Cronbach's α was 0.944 for the test and 0.949 for the retest. The reliability (r) of questions by CFQ score (≥15, ≥18, ≥20) ranged from 0.533-0.928 (p <0.05), and the r score of the NRS and VAS were the highest in CFQ scores ≥20, at 0.933 (p<0.001). The agreement rate of the SEID-Q27 between the test and retest was 87% (kappa k=0.743). Conclusions: The SEID-Q27 seems to be reliable. Further studies are needed to measure the validity of the tool and the cutoff point.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Institute of Medicine, Beyond Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: Redefining an Illness. The National Academies of Sciences Engineering Medicine. Institute of medicine(IOM) 2015.
  2. Hawk C, Jason LA, Torres-Harding S. Reliability of a chronic fatigue syndrome Questionnaire. Journal of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome 2006;13(4):41-66. https://doi.org/10.1300/J092v13n04_05
  3. Shin HC. Overview of chronic fatigue syndrome for primary care physicians. Journal of Korean Family Medicine 2001;22(12):1717-42.
  4. Nacul LC, Lacerda EM, Pheby D, Campion P, Molokhia M, Fayyaz S, et al. Prevalence of myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) in three regions of England: a repeated cross-sectional study in primary care. BioMed Central Medicine 2011;9:91.
  5. Speight N. Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome: Review of history, clinical features, and controversies. Saudi J Med Med Sci 2013;1(1):11-3. https://doi.org/10.4103/1658-631x.112905
  6. Christley Y, Duffy T, Martin CR. A review or the definitional criteria for chronic fatigue syndrome. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 2012;18(1):25-31. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01512.x
  7. Morris G, Maes M. Case definitions and diagnostic criteria for Myalgic Encephalomyelitis and Chronic fatigue syndrome: from clinical-consensus to evidence-based case definitions. Act Nerv Super Rediviva 2013;55(1-2):64-78.
  8. Johnston S, Brenu EW, Staines DR, Marshall-Gradisnik S. The adoption of chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis case definitions to assess prevalence: a systematic review. Ann Epidemiol 2013;23(6):371-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2013.04.003
  9. 최종후, 전새봄. Poll from the beginning to the end. 3rd ed. Paju: 자유아카데미; 2013, p. 77-8.
  10. Chalder T, Berelowitz G, Pawlikowska T, Watts L, Wessely S, Wright D, et al. Development of a fatigue scale. J Psychosom Res 1993;37(2):147-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3999(93)90081-P
  11. Cella M, Chalder T. Measuring fatigue in clinical and community settings. J Psychosom Res 2010;69(1):17-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2009.10.007
  12. Jung JH, Park HK. Experiences of illness and socialization of suffering in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome. Korean Association of Health and Medical Sociology 2016;42(42):5-38.
  13. Haney E, Smith MB, McDonagh M, Pappas M, Daeges M, Wasson N, et al. Diagnostic Methods for Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic fatigue syndrome: A systematic review for a National institute of health pathways to prevention workshop. Annals of Internal Medicine 2015;162(12):834-40. https://doi.org/10.7326/M15-0443
  14. Jason LA, So S, Brown AA, Sunnquist M, Evans M. Test-Retest Reliability of the DePaul Symptom Questionnaire. Fatigue 2015;3(1):16-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/21641846.2014.978110
  15. Dijkers MP, Kropp GC, Esper RM, Yavuzer G, Cullen N, Bakdalieh Y. Reporting on reliability and validity of outcome measures in medical rehabilitation research. Disabil Rehabil 2002;24(16):819-27. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638280210148585
  16. Nijs J, Vaes P, De Meirleir K. The Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Activities and Participation Questionnaire (CFS-APQ): an overview. Occup Ther Int 2005;12(2):107-721. https://doi.org/10.1002/oti.19
  17. Hyde B. Are myalgic encephalomyelitis and chronic fatigue syndrome synonymous?. They Syndrome Sentinel 1999;3:5-8.
  18. Vaes JP, McGregor N, Van Hoof E, De Meirleir K. Psychometric properties of the Dutch Chronic Fatigue Syndrome-Activities and Participation Questionnaire (CFS-APQ). Phys Ther 2003;83(5):444-54. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/83.5.444
  19. Jason LA, Evans M, Brown M, Porter N, Brown A, Hunnell J, et al. Fatigue Scales and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: Issues of Sensitivity and Specificity. Disabil Stud Q 2011;31(1):1375.
  20. CFS/ME Working Group. Report to the Chief Medical Officer of an Independent working group. Department of health 2001. Available from; www.doh.gov.uk/cmo/cfsmer
  21. Lim EJ, Ahn YC, Jang ES, Lee SW, Lee SH, Son CG. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME). J Translational Medicine 2020;18(1):100. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12967-020-02269-0

피인용 문헌

  1. SEID(Systemic Exertion Intolerance Disease) 진단 기준을 바탕으로 한 만성 피로 증후군 진단 설문지(SEID-Q27) 타당도 연구 vol.41, pp.6, 2020, https://doi.org/10.22246/jikm.2020.41.6.1015