中国临床心理学杂志

焦虑敏感指数—3中文版在乳腺癌患者中的应用

单位：1. 中南大学湘雅二医院医学心理学研究所长沙 410011
2. 中南大学湘雅医院乳腺科长沙 410008

分类号：R395.1

出版年,卷(期):页码：2013,21(6):974-976

摘要：

目的:评估焦虑敏感指数-3(ASI-3)中文版在乳腺癌患者中使用的信度和效度。方法:用焦虑敏感指数-3(ASI-3)和汉密尔顿焦虑量表(HAMA)对676名女性乳腺癌患者施测,初测两周后,从原样本中随机抽取50名女性进行重测。结果:全量表的Cronbach'sα系数为0.94,3个分量表的Cronbach'sα系数在0.91-0.93之间;全量表的重测信度为0.86,3个分量表的重测信度在0.67-0.80之间;全量表条目间平均相关系数为0.49,3个分量表条目间平均相关系数在0.64-0.69之间。验证性因子分析各指标:CFI(0.941),NFI(0.929),TLI(0.929),RMSEA(0.083)均符合测量学要求,支持量表三因素模型的理论构想。焦虑敏感指数得分与焦虑症状之间显著正相关。结论:ASI-3具有很好的信度和效度,是评估我国女性乳腺癌患者焦虑敏感的可靠工具。

Objective:To assess the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of Anxiety Sensitivity index-3 in Chinese women with breast cancer.Methods:The ASI-3 and HAMA were administrated to 676 women with breast cancer,and two weeks later, the ASI-3 was retested among 50 women sampling from the original sample.Results:The Cronbach'sα coefficient for the total scale was 0.94 and for the three subscales were ranged from 0.91-0.93; The two-week test-retest coefficient was 0.86 for the total scale and were from 0.67-0.80 for the subscales; The mean inter-item correlation coeffi cient for the total scale was 0.49, and for the three subscales were ranged from 0.64-0.69. Results of confirmatory factor analysis such as CFI(0.94), NFI(0.929), TLI(0.929), RMSEA(0.083) confirmed the original three-factor model.Conclusion:The ASI-3 has good psychometric quality, which can be applied to assess anxiety sensitivity in Chinese women with breast cancer effectively.

基金项目：

国家科技支撑计划(2009BAI77B06)资助

作者简介：

参考文献：

1 Reiss S. Expectancy model of fear, anxiety, and panic. Clini-cal Psychology Review, 1991, 11(2)：141-153
2 Reiss S, Havercamp. The sensitivity theory of motivation:Implications for psychopathology. Behaviour Research andTherapy, 1996, 34(8): 621-632
3 李茜茜，郭兰婷，冯正直，等. 焦虑敏感问卷中文版的信度和效度. 中国心理卫生杂志，2006，20(10)：675-678
4 温翠琪，李而谨，黄建美，等. 乳腺癌患者围手术期焦虑与社会支持的相关性研究. 中国实用护理杂志，2005，8：3-4
5 Reiss S. Anxiety sensitivity, anxiety frequency and the pre-diction of fearfulness. Behaviour Research and Therapy,1986, 24(1): 1-8
6 Taylor S, Cox BJ. An expanded anxiety sensitivity index: Ev-idence for a hierarchic structure in a clinical sample. Jour-nal of Anxiety Disorders, 1998, 12(5): 463-483
7 Lim Y, Kim J. Korean anxiety sensitivity index-3: Its factorstructure, reliability, and validity in non-clinical samples.Psychiatric Symptomatology, 2012, 9: 45-53
8 Taylor S, Zvolensky MJ, Cox BJ, et al. Robust dimensions ofanxiety sensitivity: Development and initial validation of theanxiety sensitivity index—3. Psychological Assessment,2007, 19(2): 176-188
9 王纯. 汉密尔顿焦虑量表的因素结构研究. 临床精神医学杂志，2011，5：299-301
10 Costa PT, McCrae RR. Revised NEO personality inventory(NEO-PI-R) and NEO five -factor inventory(NEO-FFI) pr-ofessional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological AssessmentResources, 1992. 101
11 罗杰，戴晓阳. “大五” 人格测验在我国使用情况的元分析. 中国临床心理学杂志，2011，19(6)：740-742，752
12 王孟成，戴晓阳，姚树桥. 中国大五人格问卷的初步编制Ⅰ：理论框架与信度分析.中国临床心理学杂志，2010，18(5)：545-548
13 Briggs SR, Cheek JM. The role of factor analysis in the deve-lopment of personality scales. Journal of Personality, 1986,54: 106-148
14 Asmundson GJG, Stein MB. Selective processing of socialthreat in patients with generalized social phobia: Evaluationusing a dot-probe paradigm. J Anxiety Disorder, 1994, 8:107-117
15 Ball SG, Otto MW, Pollack MH, et al. Differentiating socialphobia and panic disorder: A test of core beliefs. CognitTher Res, 1995,19: 473-482
16 Reiss S. Expectancy model of fear, anxiety, and panic. Clini-cal Psychology Review, 1991, 11(2): 141-153
17 Toshimasa M, Taketo Y, Kentaro I, et al. Reliability and va-lidity of the Japanese version of the anxiety sensitivity index.Comprehensive Psychiatry 48 (2007) 289– 292

服务与反馈：

【文章下载】【加入收藏】