中国南京意识恢复量表在急性意识障碍患者中应用的单中心信度与效度研究

关键词：中国南京意识恢复量表  急性意识障碍  评分量表  信度  效度

Keywords:China Nanjing consciousness recovery scale  acute disorder of consciousness  score scale  reliability  validity

摘要：

      摘要 目的：探讨中国南京意识恢复量表（CNCRS）在评估急性意识障碍（DOC）患者中的信度和效度。 方法：统计南京紫金医院2023年8月—2024年8月符合入组条件的急性意识障碍患者共306例，分别用格拉斯哥昏迷评分量表（GCS）和CNCRS评分，计算入组患者GCS和CNCRS评分的相关性，对比两个量表的信度和效度。 结果：入组患者的DOC程度较重，气管切开率61.8%。GCS评分中位数男性为7（5，10）、女性为6（5，9）；CNCRS评分中位数男性为3（1，8）、女性为3（1，7）；两个量表评分结果在男女之间比较均有显著相关性（P＜0.001）。CNCRS量表的信度指标克朗巴赫α系数（男0.918，女0.889）高于GCS量表（男0.687，女0.658）；效度指标Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin（KMO）值（男0.891，女0.857）也高于GCS量表（男0.600，女0.602）。 结论：CNCRS可用于急性意识障碍患者的评估，具有较好的信度和效度。

Abstract:

      Abstract Objective：To investigate the reliability and validity of the China Nanjing consciousness recovery scale （CNCRS） in assessing patients with acute disorder of consciousness （DOC）. Method：A total of 306 patients with acute DOC admitted to Nanjing Zijin Hospital between August 2023 and August 2024 were enrolled. Each patient was assessed using both the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and CNCRS. The correlation between GCS and CNCRS scores were analyzed， and the reliability and validity of these two scales were compared. Result：The DOC degree of enrolled patients was severe， with a tracheotomy rate of 61.8%. The median GCS score was 7（5，10） for males and 6（5，9） for females, while the median CNCRS score was 3（1，8） for males and 3（1，7） for females. Scores from both scales were statistically significant correlated across gender groups （P<0.001）. The Cronbach’s α coefficient of CNCRS （male 0.918， female 0.889） was higher than that of GCS（male 0.687， female 0.658）,indicating superior internal consistency. The validity index Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin（KMO） value（male 0.891，female 0.857） was also higher than the GCS scale （male 0.600， female 0.602）, demonstrating better construct validity. Conclusion：The CNCRS demonstrates good reliability and validity and can be effectively applied for the evaluation of patients with acute disturbance of consciousness.