期刊文献+

FOUR评分与颅脑损伤患者呼吸机相关性肺炎的相关性研究

Correlation between FOUR score and ventilator-associated pneumonia in patients with craniocerebral injury
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:探讨FOUR量表与颅脑损伤呼吸机相关性肺炎间的相关性,为降低VAP的发生率提供一定指导.方法:运用FOUR量表、BIS评分评估98例颅脑损伤患者的意识状态水平,探索FOUR评分、BIS评分与VAP发生率间的关系.结果:98例颅脑损伤患者的入院时患者的FOUR评分平均值为(8.7±2.3)分、BIS评分平均分为(68.3±12.9)分;FOUR评分与BIS评分呈正相关(r=0.93,P<0.05),FOUR评分与VAP发生率间也存在相关关系(P<0.05).结论:FOUR量表适合颅脑损伤患者的意识状态评估,且FOUR评分、BIS评分能够预测VAP发生率,对临床降低VAP发生率有指导意义. Objective:To investigate the correlation between FOUR scale and ventilator-associated pneumonia in craniocerebral injury,and to provide some guidance for reducing the incidence of VAP.Methods:FOUR scale and BIS score were used to evaluate the state of consciousness of 98 patients with craniocerebral injury,and to explore the relationship between FOUR score,BIS score and VAP incidence.Results:The mean FOUR scores of the 98 patients with craniocerebral injury were(8.7±2.3)and the BIS scores were(68.3±12.9).The FOUR score was positively correlated with the BIS score(r=0.93,P<0.05),there was also a correlation between FOUR score and VAP incidence(P<0.05).Conclusion:The FOUR scale is suitable for the assessment of the state of consciousness in patients with craniocerebral injury,and the FOUR score and BIS score can predict the incidence of VAP,which has a guiding significance for the clinical reduction of VAP.
作者 化娜娜 王忠丽 HUA Na-na;WANG Zhong-li(The First Affiliated Hospital of USTC,Hefei 230001,Anhui)
出处 《安徽卫生职业技术学院学报》 2019年第3期138-139,141,共3页 Journal of Anhui Health Vocational & Technical College
关键词 全面无反应量表 意识状态 颅脑损伤患者 呼吸及相关性肺炎 Comprehensive non-response scale State of consciousness Patients with craniocerebral injury Respiratory and related pneumonia
  • 相关文献

参考文献6

二级参考文献37

  • 1周卫红,许民辉,周继红.颅脑创伤严重程度与结局评分的方法——格拉斯哥评分[J].伤害医学(电子版),2013,2(3):31-36. 被引量:23
  • 2Tsang KK, Whitfield PC. Traumatic brain injury: review of current management strategies [J]. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 2012,50 (4) : 298-308.
  • 3Chaiwat O, Sharma D, Udomphorn Y, et al. Cerebral hemodynamic predictors of poor 6-month Glasgow Outcome Score in severe pediatric traumatic brain injury [J]. J Neurotrauma, 2009,26(5 ) : 657-663.
  • 4Wijdicks EFM, Bamlet WR, Maramattom BV, et al. Validation of a new coma scale: The FOUR score [J]. Anna Neurol, 2005, 58(4) :585-593.
  • 5Mareati E, Rieci S, Casalena A, et al. Validation of the Italian version of a new coma scale: the FOUR score [J]. Intern Emerg Med, 2012,7 (2) : 145-152.
  • 6Johnson VD, Whitcomb J. Neuro/Trauma intensive care unit nurses' perception of the use of the full outline of unresponsiveness score versus the Glasgow Coma Scale when assessing the neurological status of intensive care unit patients [J]. Dimens Crit Care Nuts, 2013,32(4) : 180-183.
  • 7Idrovo L, Fuentes B, Medina J, et al. Validation of the FOUR Score (Spanish Version) in acute stroke: an interobserver variability study [J]. Euro Neurol, 2010,63(6) :364-369.
  • 8Cohen J. Interrater reliability and predictive validity of the FOUR score coma scale in a pediatric population [J], J Neuroscience Nurses, 2009,41 (5) : 261-267.
  • 9Btiytikcam F, Kaya U, Karakdlc ME, et al. Predicting the outcome in children with head trauma: comparison of FOUR score and Glasgow Coma Scale [J]. Ulus Travma Aeil Cerrahi Derg, 2012,18(6) :469-473.
  • 10贺影忠,王治平,王洁.昏迷患儿动态观察格拉斯哥昏迷评分的临床意义[J].中国当代儿科杂志,2008,10(5):614-616. 被引量:8

共引文献107

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