The Journal of Internal Korean Medicine (대한한방내과학회지)

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

DOI QR Code

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

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

  • 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)
  • 임은진 (대전대학교 한의학과, 동서생명과학연구원) ;
  • 손창규 (대전대학교 한의학과, 동서생명과학연구원) ;
  • 장은수 (대전대학교 한의학과, 동서생명과학연구원)
  • Received : 2020.03.12
  • Accepted : 2020.06.29
  • Published : 2020.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

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.

Keywords

References

  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

Cited by

  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