卒中后抑郁障碍评价工具的国际应用现况  

Current status of international application of the post-stroke depression outcome measurement instruments

作　　者：童若一 张鑫宇 王彩薇 吴大嵘 王宇峰[4] 万赖思琪 陈建斌 蔡坚雄 TONG Ruoyi;ZHANG Xinyu;WANG Caiwei;WU Darong;WANG Yufeng;WANLAI Siqi;CHEN Jianbin;CAI Jianxiong(The Second Clinical Medical College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine,Guangzhou 510120,China;The Basic Medicine College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine,Guangzhou 510120,China;State Key Laboratory of Dampness Syndrome of Chinese Medicine,the Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine/Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine,Guangzhou 510125,China;Department of Massage,Affiliated Hospital of Changchun University of Chinese Medicine,Changchun 130021,China;Chinese Medicine Clinical Outcome Evaluation Research Team,the Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine/Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine,Guangzhou 510125,China;Department of Psychology,School of Public Health,Southern Medical University,Guangzhou 510515,China)

机构地区：[1]广州中医药大学第二临床医学院,广州510120 [2]广州中医药大学基础医学院,广州510120 [3]广州中医药大学第二附属医院/广东省中医院省部共建中医湿证国家重点实验室,广州510125 [4]长春中医药大学附属医院推拿科,长春130021 [5]广州中医药大学第二附属医院/广东省中医院中医临床结局评价研究团队,广州510125 [6]南方医科大学公共卫生学院心理学系,广州510515

出　　处：《吉林中医药》2022年第11期1284-1289,共6页Jilin Journal of Chinese Medicine

基　　金：国家重点研发计划(2018YFC1706006)。

摘　　要：目的为卒中后抑郁评价工具选择和研究提供参考。方法检索和分析Pubmed等数据库文献中相关评价工具的应用情况。结果常用工具包括量表、实验室及影像学评价三种,以量表应用最广泛,其中卒中人群抑郁量表尚未体现其评价优势,而一般人群抑郁量表的适用性更高;实验室和影像学评价工具少量用于科研或辅助评价。结论目前该领域评价工具种类较多,缺乏规范的选择指引,降低了相关研究结果的共性价值。有必要深入对比研究这些工具的测量特性、选择偏好等内容,以提升工具选择的合理性和规范性。Objective To provide a directional reference for the outcome measurements selection and research of post-stroke depression(PSD)based on an English literature review.Methods A literature search was conducted on the databases of Embase,Pubmed,Midss,COSMIN,ROM and ProQolid.The PSD outcome measurement instruments in the studies were collected and their application was analyzed.Results The common PSD outcome measurement tools included scales,laboratory tests and medical imaging examinations.Scales were the most widely accepted instrument,which could be further categorized into the general screening scale,the general population depression scale and the PSD scale.The PSD scale showed no advantages in the PSD clinical application,while the classic general population depression scale appeared to be more applicable.Laboratory tests and medical imaging examinations were used less in clinical practice rather mostly used for scientific research or auxiliary evaluation.Conclusion Despite a variety of PSD outcome measurement instruments at present,valid guidelines on their selection are yet to be developed,resulting in the decrease of the consistency and universal values of those relevant research results.Therefore,it is necessary to further compare and analyze the common PSD outcome measurement tools from the vision of measurement property,assessment mode,user preference and localization,which can promote the rationality and standardization of tools selection.

关 键 词：卒中 抑郁 评价工具 

分 类 号：R255.2[医药卫生—中医内科学]