心脏康复依从性评估工具测量学属性的系统评价

doi:10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2024.06.014

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的对心脏康复依从性评估工具进行系统评价，以期为临床医护人员选择合适的评估工具提供依据。方法检索美国心肺康复协会网站、英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所网站、PubMed、CINAHL、PsycINFO、Embase、Web of Science、中国知网、万方数据库、维普数据库及中国生物医学文献数据库公开发表的心血管疾病患者心脏康复依从性评估工具的研究，检索时限为建库至2022年12月3日。由2名研究人员独立筛选文献，提取数据，按照基于共识的健康测量工具遴选标准要求，对纳入研究进行方法学质量和测量学属性评价，依据改良版定量系统评价证据分级方法进行证据质量评级后形成推荐意见。结果共纳入12项研究，涉及7个心脏康复依从性评估工具，7个评估工具均未报告跨文化效度/测量不变性、测量误差及反应度；心脏康复依从性评估工具由于有高质量的证据证明其内部一致性的不充分，为C类，不推荐。其余6个评估工具因内容效度的不确定或内部一致性的不充分，证据质量为中、低等，均为B类，推荐。结论与其他6个评估工具相比，心脏康复障碍量表的测量学属性得到了较为全面的评价，具有较好的信效度，可暂时被推荐使用，但仍需更多高质量证据来进一步探究心血管疾病患者心脏康复依从性的评估工具。

关键词: 心血管疾病, 心脏康复, 依从性, 评估工具, 测量学属性, 系统评价, 康复护理学

Abstract:

Objective To evaluate the systematic review of the cardiac rehabilitation adherence assessment tools，so as to provide references for the selection of appropriate research tools. Methods We searched the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation website，the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence website，PubMed，CINAHL，PsycINFO，Embase，Web of Science，CNKI，Wanfang database，VIP database and Chinese Biomedical Literature database for published studies on cardiac rehabilitation adherence assessment tools for patients with cardiovascular disease，and the search time limit is from the establishment of the databases to December 3，2022. 2 researchers independently screened the literature，extracted data，and evaluated the methodological quality and the psychometric properties of the included studies according to the consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments，and the modified grading of recommendations assessment，development of evaluation was used to classify the grade of evidence and recommendations of the tools. Results A total of 12 studies were included，involving 7 cardiac rehabilitation adherence assessment tools. None of the 7 assessment tools reported cross-cultural validity or measurement invariance，measurement error or respon-siveness；the Cardiac Rehabilitation Adherence Tool is Category C and not recommended due to high quality evidence of inadequate internal consistency. The remaining 6 assessment tools are of moderate or low quality of evidence due to uncertainty of content validity or inadequate internal consistency，and all are category B and recommended. Conclusion Compared with the other 6 assessment tools，the Cardiac Rehabilitation Barriers Scale was evaluated more comprehensively for its psychometric properties with good reliability and validity，and it can be provisionally recommended for use. However，more high-quality evidence is still needed to further explore assessment tools for cardiac rehabilitation adherence in patients with cardiovascular disease.

Key words: Cardiovascular Disease, Cardiac Rehabilitation, Adherence, Assessment Tools, Psychome-trics, Systematic Review, Rehabilitation Nursing

王旋, 温贤秀, 苟莉, 周丽娟, 陈付利, 吴海燕, 王良. 心脏康复依从性评估工具测量学属性的系统评价[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2024, 59(6): 736-743.

WANG Xuan, WEN Xianxiu, GOU Li, ZHOU Lijuan, CHEN Fuli, WU Haiyan, WANG Liang. The cardiac rehabilitation adherence assessment tools：a systematic review of psychometric properties[J]. Chinese Journal of Nursing, 2024, 59(6): 736-743.

图/表 5

图1 PubMed检索策略

Figure 1 Search strategy of PubMed

图2 文献筛选流程图

Figure 2 Flow chart of literature selection

表1 纳入文献的基本特征（n=12）

Table 1 The basic characteristics of the included assessment studies（n=12）

表2 纳入评估工具的方法学质量和测量学属性评价（n=12）

Table 2 Methodological quality evaluation and psychometric properties evaluation of the included assess-ment tools（n=12）

表3 纳入评估工具的质量合成结果及推荐意见（n=7）

Table 3 Quality synthesis results and recommendations for the inclusion of assessment tools（n=7）

参考文献 32

[1]	中华护理学会老年护理专业委员会, 中国康复医学会心血管疾病预防与康复专业委员会, 中国老年保健协会脏器康复专业委员会. 心脏康复护理专家共识[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2022, 57(16):1937-1941.
	Geriatric Nursing Committee of Chinese Nursing Association, Committee of Cardiac Rehabilitation and Prevention of Chinese Association of Rehabilitation Medicine, Organ Reha-bilitation Committee of Chinese Elder Health Care Association. Chinese expert consensus on cardiac rehabilitation nursing care[J]. Chin J Nurs, 2022, 57(16):1937-1941.
[2]	周明成, 洪怡. 《美国心肺康复协会(AACVPR)心脏康复指南第六版》关于科学运动与训练的更新要点[J]. 实用心脑肺血管病杂志, 2021, 29(6):1-6.
	Zhou MC, Hong Y. Updated essentials of scientific exercise and training in the 6th edition of the guidelines for cardiac rehabilitation programs by American Association of Cardiova-scular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation[J]. Pract J Cardiac Cereb Pneumal Vasc Dis, 2021, 29(6):1-6.
[3]	Taylor RS, Dalal HM, McDonagh STJ. The role of cardiac reha-bilitation in improving cardiovascular outcomes[J]. Nat Rev Cardiol, 2022, 19(3):180-194. DOI
[4]	中国心血管疾病患者居家康复专家共识编写组. 中国心血管疾病患者居家康复专家共识[J]. 中国循环杂志, 2022, 37(2):108-121.
	Experts Consensus Writing Group on Home-based Cardiac Rehabilitation in China. Experts consensus on home-based cardiac rehabilitation in China[J]. Chin Circul J, 2022, 37(2):108-121.
[5]	Shanmugasegaram S, Gagliese L, Oh P, et al. Psychometric vali-dation of the Cardiac Rehabilitation Barriers Scale[J]. Clin Re-habil, 2012, 26(2):152-164.
[6]	Ghisi GL, Grace SL, Thomas S, et al. Development and psycho-metric validation of a scale to assess information needs in cardiac rehabilitation:the INCR Tool[J]. Patient Educ Couns, 2013, 91(3):337-343. DOI URL
[7]	Micklewright D, Northeast L, Parker P, et al. The cardiac reha-bilitation inventory:a new method of tailoring patient support[J]. J Cardiovasc Nurs, 2016, 31(2):175-185. DOI PMID
[8]	夏瑶瑶, 李颐, 熊晓云, 等. 冠心病病人心脏康复护理需求评估工具的研究进展[J]. 护理研究, 2023, 37(9):1598-1601.
	Xia YY, Li Y, Xiong XY, et al. Research progress on assess-ment tools for cardiac rehabilitation nursing needs in coronary heart disease patients[J]. Chin Nurs Res, 2023, 37(9):1598-1601.
[9]	Prinsen CAC, Mokkink LB, Bouter LM, et al. COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures[J]. Qual Life Res, 2018, 27(5):1147-1157. DOI PMID
[10]	Mokkink LB, de Vet HCW, Prinsen CAC, et al. COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist for systematic reviews of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures[J]. Qual Life Res, 2018, 27(5):1171-1179. DOI PMID
[11]	陈祎婷, 沈蓝君, 彭健, 等. 改良版定量系统评价证据分级方法对患者报告结局测量工具的评价[J]. 解放军护理杂志, 2020, 37(10):57-60.
	Chen YT, Shen LJ, Peng J, et al. Modified GRADE evaluation of COSMIN method for patient reported outcome measures[J]. Nurs J Chin PLA, 2020, 37(10):57-60.
[12]	Mokkink LB, Prinsen CA, Patrick DL, et al. COSMIN methodo-logy for systematic reviews of patient-user manual[EB/OL]. (2018-06-05) [2023-02-23]. http/cosmin.nl/wp-content/up-loads/COSMIN-syst-review-for-PROMs-manual_version-1_feb-2018.pdf.
[13]	Cooper AF, Weinman J, Hankins M, et al. Assessing patients’ beliefs about cardiac rehabilitation as a basis for predicting attendance after acute myocardial infarction[J]. Heart, 2007, 93(1):53-58.
[14]	Fernandez RS, Salamonson Y, Juergens C, et al. Validation of the revised cardiac rehabilitation preference form in patients with post-percutaneous coronary intervention[J]. J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev, 2007, 27(6):390-394. DOI URL
[15]	Fernandez RS, Salamonson Y, Juergens C, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the Cardiac Rehabilitation Enrol-ment Obstacles(CREO) Scale:implications for service develo-pment[J]. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs, 2008, 7(2):96-102. DOI URL
[16]	邱孝丰, 邱晨, 王玉玲, 等. 心脏康复阻碍因素量表的汉化及信效度检验[J]. 解放军医学院学报, 2018, 39(12):1067-1071.
	Qiu XF, Qiu C, Wang YL, et al. Reliability and validity of Chinese version of Cardiac Rehabilitation Barriers Scale[J]. Acad J Chin PLA Med Sch, 2018, 39(12):1067-1071.
[17]	肖静, 黄伶智, 李乐之. 心脏康复信息需求量表的汉化及信效度评价研究[J]. 中国全科医学, 2018, 21(5):585-590. DOI
	Xiao J, Huang LZ, Li LZ. Development of a Chinese version of Information Needs in Cardiac Rehabilitation Scale and test of its reliability and validity[J]. Chin Gen Pract, 2018, 21(5):585-590.
[18]	Hamedani B, Shahsavari H, Amaniyan S, et al. Development and psychometric evaluation of the Cardiac Rehabilitation Adhe-rence Tool(CRAT)[J]. J Cardiovasc Dev Dis, 2019, 6(3):25.
[19]	Ma CH, Yang QQ, Huang SL. Translation and psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the information needs in cardiac rehabilitation tool[J]. J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev, 2019, 39(5):331-337. DOI URL
[20]	王俊红, 张振香, 杨巧芳, 等. 心脏康复量表的汉化及信效度评价[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2019, 54(4):632-636. DOI
	Wang JH, Zhang ZX, Yang QF, et al. Translation and reliabi-lity and validity of the Chinese version of the Cardiac Reha-bilitation Inventory[J]. Chin J Nurs, 2019, 54(4):632-636.
[21]	Liu X, Fowokan A, Grace SL, et al. Translation,cross-cultural adaptation,and psychometric validation of the Chinese/Man darin Cardiac Rehabilitation Barriers Scale(CRBS-C/M)[J]. Rehabil Res Pract, 2021:5511426.
[22]	陈欢, 侯朝铭, 高静, 等. 中文版高血压患者服药依从性量表测量学特性的系统评价[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2023, 58(2):171-178. DOI
	Chen H, Hou CM, Gao J, et,al. Chinese version of the medi-cation adherence scale for patients with hypertension:a systematic review of psychometric properties[J]. Chin J Nurs, 2023, 58(2):171-178.
[23]	Terwee CB, Prinsen CAC, Chiarotto A, et al. COSMIN metho-dology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures:a Delphi study[J]. Qual Life Res, 2018, 27(5):1159-1170. DOI PMID
[24]	彭健, 沈蓝君, 陈祎婷, 等. COSMIN-RoB清单简介及测量工具内部结构研究的偏倚风险清单解读[J]. 中国循证医学杂志, 2020, 20(10):1234-1240.
	Peng J, Shen LJ, Chen YT, et al. An overview of the COSMIN-RoB checklist and the interpretation of it in evaluating the risk of bias of studies on internal structure[J]. Chin J Evid Based Med, 2020, 20(10):1234-1240.
[25]	Olshansky E, Lakes KD, Vaughan J, et al. Enhancing the cons-truct and content validity of rating scales for clinical research:using qualitative methods to develop a rating scale to assess parental perceptions of their role in promoting infant exercise[J]. Int J Educ Psychol Assess, 2012, 10(1):36-50.
[26]	张珊珊, 李惠萍, 张婷, 等. 癌症患者家庭韧性评估工具的质量评价[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2022, 57(3):356-362. DOI
	Zhang SS, Li HP, Zhang T, et al. Quality appraisal of family resilience assessment tools for cancer patients[J]. Chin J Nurs, 2022, 57(3):356-362. DOI
[27]	高云, 赵俊峰, 徐丽丽, 等. COSMIN 操作指南对中文版电子健康素养量表的评价[J]. 中国老年学杂志, 2020, 40(9):1968-1973.
	Gao Y, Zhao JF, Xu LL, et al. Evaluation of the Chinese version of the e-Health Literacy Scale[J]. Chin J Gerontol, 2020, 40(9):1968-1973.
[28]	彭健, 沈蓝君, 陈祎婷, 等. 对COSMIN-RoB清单中测量工具稳定性、测量误差和效标效度研究偏倚风险的清单解读[J]. 中国循证医学杂志, 2020, 20(11):1340-1344.
	Peng J, Shen LJ, Chen YT, et al. Interpretation of COSMIN risk of bias checklist in evaluating risk of bias of studies on reliability,measurement error and criteria validity of patient-reported outcome measures[J]. Chin J Evid-Based Med, 2020, 20(11):1340-1344.
[29]	赵亚楠, 李燕, 张静, 等. 基于共识的健康测量工具遴选标准对分娩恐惧量表测量属性的系统评价[J]. 中华护理教育, 2022, 19(4):378-384.
	Zhao YN, Li Y, Zhang J, et al. The instruments of measuring fear of childbirth in pregnancy based on COSMIN:a syste-matic review of psychometric properties[J]. Chin J Nurs Educ, 2022, 19(4):378-384.
[30]	Horwood H, Williams MJ, Mandic S. Examining motivations and barriers for attending maintenance community-based cardiac rehabilitation using the health-belief model[J]. Heart Lung Circ, 2015, 24(10):980-987. DOI PMID
[31]	Foster EJ, Munoz SA, Crabtree D, et al. Barriers and facilita-tors to participating in cardiac rehabilitation and physical activity in a remote and rural population:a cross-sectional survey[J]. Cardiol J, 2021, 28(5):697-706. DOI URL
[32]	Alexandre A, Schmidt C, Campinas A, et al. Clinical determi-nants and barriers to cardiac rehabilitation enrollment of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction:a single-center study in Portugal[J]. J Cardiovasc Dev Dis, 2022, 9(10):344.