城市分娩创伤量表的汉化及信效度检验

doi:10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2020.11.028

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的汉化城市分娩创伤量表（City Birth Trauma Scale,City BiTS）,并对其信效度进行检验。方法采用Brislin翻译模型对量表进行翻译、回译和文化调试,形成中文版City BiTS。2019年6月—10月,采用便利抽样法对镇江市2所三级甲等医院的328名产妇进行问卷调查,评价量表的信效度。结果中文版City BiTS共29个条目,对症状反应量表（Q3~Q22）进行探索性因子分析,共提取2个公因子,累计方差贡献率为54.907%;总量表的Cronbach’s α系数为0.934,各维度的Cronbach’s α系数为0.896~0.906,重测信度为0.908,折半信度为0.821;总量表的内容效度指数为0.93,各维度的内容效度指数为0.83~1.00。结论中文版City BiTS在国内文化背景下具有良好的信效度,为国内诊断产后创伤后应激障碍提供可靠的研究工具,并为医护人员实施心理干预提供依据。

关键词: 分娩, 创伤后应激障碍, 信度, 效度, 产科护理

Abstract:

Objective To translate the English version of City Birth Trauma Scale（City BiTS） into Chinese,and to preliminarily test its reliability and validity. Methods According to the Brislin translation model,the English version of City BiTS was translated into Chinese,and then was back-translated and modified for cultural adaptation followed by the guidelines. From June 2019 to October 2019,328 parturients in 2 tertiary hospitals in Zhenjiang were included by a convenience sampling method for a questionnaire survey,in order to evaluate its reliability and validity. Results The Chinese version of City BiTS contained 29 items. 2 common factors were extracted from the response scale （Q3~Q22） through exploratory factor analysis,and the factor cumulative variance contribution rate was 54.907%. The Cronbach’s α coefficient of the total scale was 0.934,and 0.896~0.906 for the 2 dimensions. The test-retest reliability of the total scale was 0.908;the split-half reliability was 0.821. The Scale-Content Validity Index（S-CVI） was 0.93,and the Item-Content Validity Index（I-CVI） ranged from 0.83 to 1.00. Conclusion The Chinese version of the City BiTS has good reliability and validity under the Chinese culture background. It provides a reliable research tool for the diagnosis of postpartum post-traumatic stress disorder（PTSD） in China,and provides a basis for psychological interventions by medical staff.

Key words: Parturition, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Reliability, Validity, Obstetrical Nursing

沈子晨,周漾,朱冬梅,朱俊,韦嘉洁,曹卫平. 城市分娩创伤量表的汉化及信效度检验[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2020, 55(11): 1757-1761.

SHEN Zichen,ZHOU Yang,ZHU Dongmei,ZHU Jun,WEI Jiajie,CAO Weiping. Translation of the Chinese version of the City Birth Trauma Scale and the test of its reliability and validity[J]. Chinese Journal of Nursing, 2020, 55(11): 1757-1761.

图/表 1

参考文献 16

[1]	中华医学会精神科分会. CCMD-3中国精神障碍分类与诊断标准[M]. 济南: 山东科学技术出版社, 2001.
	Chinese Psychiatric Association. CCMD-3 Classification and diagnostic criteria of mental disorders in China[M]. Jinan: Shan-dong Sci and Technol Press, 2001.
[2]	代玲, 曾铁英, 袁梦梅, 等. 女性分娩创伤的研究进展[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2019,54(2):311-315.
	Dai L, Zeng TY, Yuan MM, et al. The hazards and countermeasures of female traumatic birth:a review[J]. Chin J Nurs, 2019,54(2):311-315.
[3]	de Graaff LF, Honig A, van Pampus MG, et al. Preventing post-traumatic stress disorder following childbirth and traumatic birth experiences:a systematic review[J]. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 2018,97(6):648-656. DOI URL PMID
[4]	张银锋, 侯佳伟. 中国人口实际与理想的生育年龄:1994—2012[J]. 人口与发展, 2016,22(2):2-11.
	Zhang YF, Hou JW. The actual and ideal fertility age of Chinese population:1994—2012[J]. Popul Dev, 2016,22(2):2-11.
[5]	Ayers S, Wright DB, Thornton A. Development of a measure of postpartum PTSD:the City Birth Trauma Scale[J]. Front Psy-chiatry, 2018,9:409.
[6]	邓明昱, 劳世艳. 自闭症谱系障碍的临床研究新进展(DSM-5新标准)[J]. 中国健康心理学杂志, 2016,24(4):481-490.
	Deng MY, Lao SY. New progress of clinical research to autistic spectrum disorder(DSM-5 Update)[J]. China J Heal Psychol, 2016,24(4):481-490.
[7]	Nakić Radoš S, Matijaš M, Kuhar L, et al. Measuring and conceptualizing PTSD following childbirth:Validation of the City Birth Trauma Scale[J]. Psychol Trauma, 2020,12(2):147-155. DOI URL PMID
[8]	Brislin RW. Back-translation for cross-cultural research[J]. J Cross-Cult Psychol, 1970,1(3):185-216. DOI URL
[9]	颜霞, 杨子樱, 王婷, 等. 癌症治疗功能评价-骨髓移植分量表的汉化及信效度检验[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2019,54(1):151-154.
	Yan X, Yang ZY, Wang T, et al. Functional Assessment of Cancer Treatment-Bone Marrow Transplant(FACT-BMT):translation and reliability and validity testing[J]. Chin J Nurs, 2019,54(1):151-154.
[10]	于海静. 母乳喂养评估量表的初步修订与应用[D]. 长沙:中南大学, 2012.
	Yu HJ. The preliminary revision and application of maternal breastfeeding evaluation scale[D]. Changsha：Central South Univ- ersity, 2012.
[11]	金瑜. 心理测量[M]. 上海: 华东师范大学出版社, 2001.
	Jin Y. Psychological measurement[M]. Shanghai: East China Nor-mal University Press, 2001.
[12]	肖艳艳, 杨雪, 肖树芹, 等. 老年持续评估记录和评价条目集的汉化及信效度检验[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2018,53(6):762-768.
	Xiao YY, Yang X, Xiao SQ, et al. Development and validation of the Chinese version of Continuity Assessment Record and Evaluation item set for the elderly[J]. Chin J Nurs, 2018,53(6):762-768.
[13]	Beck CT. Middle range theory of traumatic childbirth:the ever-widening ripple effect[J]. Glob Qual Nurs Res, 2015,2:2333-3936.
[14]	田家利, 刘宇, 张素, 等. 家庭护理评估量表的汉化和信效度检验[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2019,54(2):199-205.
	Tian JL, Liu Y, Zhang S, et al. Translation and reliability and validity testing of Chinese version of InterRAI Home Care[J]. Chin J Nurs, 2019,54(2):199-205.
[15]	李翔. 创伤性损伤困扰量表的汉化修订及初步应用研究[D]. 郑州:郑州大学, 2018.
	Li X. Development and Preliminary Application of the Chinese version of the Traumatic Injuries Distress Scale[D]. Zheng zhou:Zhengzhou University, 2018.
[16]	黄丽, 江琴, 林秀霞, 等. ICU记忆评估工具的汉化和ICU记忆量表的信效度检验[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2016,51(10):1265-1269.
	Huang L, Jiang Q, Lin XX, et al. Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of Intensive Care Unit Memory Tool[J]. Chin J Nurs, 2016,51(10):1265-1269.