中文摘要：

目的：评价神经精神科问卷知情者版（Neuropsychiatric Inventory—Questionnaire，NPI—Q）中文译本的信度与效度。方法：从北京大学精神卫生研究所记忆中心的病例库中，选取51例符合NINCDS—ADR，DA诊断标准的阿尔茨海默病（probable AD）患者，接受简明智能精神状况检查（Mini—mental Status Exami—nation，MMSE）、日常生活活动量表（Activities of Daily Living，ADL）、阿尔茨海默病评定量表（Alzheimer’s disease Assessment Scale—Cognitive portion，ADAS—cog）、神经精神科问卷（Neuropsychiatric Inventory，NPI）评定，并由其知情者进行NPI—Q评分。其中16例在临床干预3个月后进行重测。结果：（1）NPI—Q克朗巴赫系数α=0．851，Guttman分半系数为0．825；NPI—Q总分重测信度为ICC=0．860（P〈0．01），NPI—Q苦恼程度总分重测信度ICC=0．480（P〉0．05）。（2）NPI—Q各条目评分之间的相关系数为0．01—0．97，均与总分呈正相关（r=0．33～0．87，P〈0．05）。NPI—Q各条目苦恼程度评分之间的相关系数为0．05—0．72，与苦恼程度总分正相关（r=0．47～0．90，P〈0．01）。NPI—Q严重程度总分与苦恼程度总分相关（r=0．78，P〈0．01）。NPI—Q严重程度评分与MMSE总分呈负相关（r=-0．39，P〈0．01），与ADL、ADAS．cog、NPI总分、NPI苦恼程度评分均相关（r=0．47～0．82，均P〈0．01）。NPI—Q苦恼程度评分与MMSE总分负相关（r=-0．32，P〈0．05），与ADL、ADAS—cog、NPI总分、NPI苦恼程度相关（r=0．29～0．68，P〈0．05）。因子分析提示NPI—Q含有精神病性、情感损害和额叶功能3个因子，总贡献率达62．23％。结论：神经精神科问卷知情者版中文泽本具有较好的信度和效度，值得推广应用。

英文摘要：

Objective： To evaluate the reliability and validity of Chinese version of Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Questionnaire （ NPI-Q） . Methods： Fifty-one patients meeting criteria of probable Alzheimer＇s disease （ AD ） of the National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Disorders and Stroke and the Alzheimer＇ s disease and Related Disorders Association （NINCDS-ADRDA） were studied. All patients were drawn from database of Dementia Care and Research Center at Peking University Institute of Mental Health. Each subject was administered with the Mini-mental Status Examination （MMSE）, Activities of Daily Living （ ADL）, Alzheimer＇s disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive portion （ ADAS-Cog）, and Neuropsychiatric Inventory （ NPI ） . The informants completed rating with NPI-Q. Sixteen subjects were retested at 3 months after initial assessment. Results ： （ 1 ） Reliability. The coefficient of inter-item consistency （Cronbach＇s α） was 0. 851 , and the Guttman split-half reliability was 0. 825. The test-retest reliability of NPI-Q total score inter-rater reliability （ICC） was 0. 860 （ P 〈 0. 01 ）, and test-retest reliability of NPI-Q total distress score ICC was 0. 480 （ P 〉 0. 05）. （ 2 ） Validity. The item scores of severity of NPI- Q were correlated with each other （ r = 0. 01 - 0. 97 ）, and with total score of NPI-Q significantly （ r = 0. 33 - 0. 87, P 〈 0. 05 ） . The item scores of distress of NPI-Q were correlated with each other （ r = 0.05 - 0. 72 ）, and with total score of distress significantly （ r = 0. 47 - 0.90, P 〈 0. 01 ） . For all items, the scores of distress were correlated with scores of severity significantly （ r =0. 60 -0. 86, P 〈0. 01 ） . The total score of NPI-Q severity was correlated with total score of distress （ r = 0. 78, P 〈 0. 01 ） . The total score of NPI-Q severity was negatively associated with total score of MMSE （ r = - 0. 39, P 〈 0. 01 ） , positively with total score of ADL, ADAS-cog, NPI an