Preliminary development and evaluation of the scale for primary hypertension with excessive rise of liver-yang

Quan Guo,Ze-qi Chen,Xiao-zhen Liu,Ding-zhu Shen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3321/j.issn:1673-8225.2006.43.006

2006-01-01

Abstract:Aim: To develop a specific scale for primary hypertension with type of excessive rise of liver-yang (ERLY) and offer an effective instrument for differentiating and evaluating the syndrome. Methods: A total of 128 out-patients or inpatients, including 98 primary hypertension patients with ERLY and 30 patients with deficiency of the liver and kidney yin, were selected from Xiangya Hospital of Central South University between August 2005 and July 2006, and received the test of ERLY to evaluate the reliability, validity, response and acceptability of scale. This scale adopted the psychological rating scale, life quality scale of WHO, relative researches, reviews of large samples investigation of clinical epidemiology, discussion of the experts, item study and experienced selection. And each item of scale was ranked as 0-4 grades, except that 3-4 grades for some specific items that were difficult to distinguish. Measured data were screened out with the following methods: 1 degree of vaiiation; 2 test; 3 degree of reaction; 4 correlation coefficient; 5 factor analysis; 6 cronbach-α coefficient. Results: All 128 subjects were involved in the result analysis. An 14-item scale for primary hypertension with type of ERLY was adopted, including two domain (deficiency of yin and excess of yang). 1 The alternative-form reliability coefficients of the scale for excess of yang, deficiency of yin and the overall scale were 0,973, 0.952 and 0.976 respectively. The cronbach-α coefficients were 0.899 2, 0.812 3 and 0.892 5 respectively. The split-half reliability coefficients were 0.858 8, 0.782 3 and 0.863 2 respectively. 2 Construct validity and discrimination validity: Two common factors were extracted, and accounted for the accumulative variance contribution of 56.121%.? The structure of the scale was similar to the theory construction. There were extremely significant differences between the test results of ERLY obtained from the two syndromes (t=12.858, P < 0.001). 3 Degree of reaction: The results of ERLY obtained from patients were significantly different before and after therapy (t=14.630, P < 0.001). Conclusion: ERLY is so reliable, valid and sensitive that can be used to differentiate and evaluate the syndrome.