期刊文献+

两种压疮危险因素评估量表在手术患者中信度和效度比较研究 被引量:98

Study on reliability and validity of the two pressure ulcer risk assessment scales in surgical patients
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的比较两种压疮危险因素评估量表(Braden量表和修订版Braden量表)用于手术患者时的信度和效度,为降低术后患者压疮发生率提供有效的压疮危险因素评估工具。方法两名护士分别应用两种量表,同时、独立地对同一患者进行评估,共211例患者接受评估。结果两种量表的评估者间一致性信度Pearson相关系数分别为0.991、0.993;克朗巴赫系数α分别为0.518~0.743,0.307~0.551;Braden量表和修订版中分别去掉“营养状况”、“体型/身高状况”条目后量表的克朗巴赫系数α最高,分别为0.829、0.721;因子分析结果显示两种量表的结构效度与原设想的基本一致;当诊断界值取19分时,修订版Braden量表手术后当天评分的灵敏度和特异度相对较平衡,分别为70.0%、58.1%。结论两种量表具有较好的评估者间一致性信度、区分度和结构效度,在手术患者中的预测效度均不理想,但修订版优于Braden量表,适合中国手术患者人群的压疮危险因素评估工具有待进一步完善。
出处 《中华护理杂志》 CSCD 北大核心 2006年第4期359-361,共3页 Chinese Journal of Nursing
关键词 压疮 危险因素评估量表 BRADEN量表 修订版Braden量表 信度 效度 Pressure ulcer Risk assessment scale Braden scale Modified Braden scale Reliability Validity
  • 相关文献

参考文献9

  • 1Aronovitch SA. Intraoperatively acquired pressure ulcer prevalence: a national study. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs, 1999, 26(3):130-136.
  • 2张长惠.采用评分法针对危险因素预防褥疮[J].国外医学(护理学分册),1996,15(5):202-203. 被引量:159
  • 3Bergstrom N, Braden BJ, Boynton P, et al. Using a research-based assessment scale in clinical practice. Nursing Clin North Am, 1995, 30(3):539-551.
  • 4Pang SM, Wong TK. Predicting pressure sore risk with the Norton, Braden and Waterlow scales in a Hong Kong rehabilitation hospital. Nurs Res,1998,47(3):147-153.
  • 5薛小玲,刘慧,景秀琛,孙志敏,童淑萍,邝惠容,彭美慈,汪国成,何淑贞.3种评估表预测压疮效果的比较研究[J].中华护理杂志,2004,39(4):241-243. 被引量:138
  • 6谢小燕,刘雪琴.对护士压疮防治相关知识现状的调查[J].中华护理杂志,2005,40(1):67-68. 被引量:157
  • 7Bergstrom N, Braden B, Kemp M, et al. Multi-site study of incidence of pressure ulcers and the relationship between risk level, demographic characteristics, diagnoses, and prescription of preventive interventions. J Am Geriatr Soc,1996, 44(1) :22-30.
  • 8Kwong E,Pang S,Wong T, et al. Predicting pressure ulcer risk with the Modified Braden, Braden and Norton Scales in acute care hospitals in China's Mainland. Appl Nurs Res , 2005,18(2):122-128.
  • 9陈平雁,黄浙明.SPSS10.0统计较件高级应用教程.北京:人民军医出版社,2004.56—68.

二级参考文献20

  • 1[1]Barratt E. Pressure scores: Putting calculators in their place. Nursing Times. 1987,18:67-70.
  • 2[2]Bergstrom N,Braden B, Laguyya A , et al. The braden scale for predicting pressure sore risk. Nursing Research, 1987,36(4):205-210.
  • 3[3]Norton D, Mclaren R, Exton Smith AN. An investigation of geriatric nursing problem in hospitals. London:National corporation for the care of old people.
  • 4[4]Pang S, Wang TK. Predicting pressure sore risk with the Norton, Braden, and Waterlow Scales in a Hong Kong rehabilitation hospital. Nursing Research, 1998,47(3):147-153.
  • 5[5]Bergstrom N, Demuth PJ, et al. A prospective study of pressure score risk among institutionalized elderly. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.1992,40:748-758.
  • 6[6]Norton D. Calculating the risk: Reflections on the Norton Scale. Decubitus, 1989,2(3): 24-31.
  • 7[7]Torrance C. Pressure scores: Aetiology, treatment, and prevention. London: Croom Helm, 1983.
  • 8[8]Bridel J. Assessing the risk of pressure sores. Nursing Standard, 1993, 7(25):32-35.
  • 9Panagiotopoulou K, Kerr SM. Pressure area care: an exploration of Greek nurses' knowledge and practice. J Adv Nurs. 2002,40(3):285-296.
  • 10Folkedahl BA, Frantz R. Prevention of pressure ulcers. Iowa City : University of Iowa Gerontological Nursing Interventions Research Center, Research Dissemination Core, 2002. 21.

共引文献434

同被引文献723

引证文献98

二级引证文献1109

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部