期刊文献+

3种评估表对骨科患者压疮预测能力的比较 被引量:5

Comparison of the predictive effectiveness of 3 pressure ulcer risk assessment scales in orthopedic inpatients
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的比较Norton、Braden和Waterlow 3种量表对骨科患者压疮的预测效果。方法选取骨科住院患者368例,运用3种量表对每例患者进行连续评估,计算各量表的灵敏度、特异度、预测值和ROC曲线下面积。结果 3种量表的最佳临界值分别为l4、16和l7分,仅Waterlow量表的ROC曲线下面积大于0.5。结论 Waterlow量表对骨科患者院内压疮的预测效果较好。 Objective To compare the predictive effectiveness of Norton, Braden and Waterlow scales to assess pressure ulcer risk in orthopedic inpatients. Methods 368 patients of department of orthopedics, using 3 kinds of scale. All the patients underwent contin- uous assessment,counting the sensitivity,the specificity,the predictive value and the area under the ROC curve. Re.suits The critical values of the 3 kinds of scales were 14,16 and 17, only the area under the ROC curve of Waterlow scale is more than 0. 5. Conclusion Waterlow scale was found to be the best indicator in the three scales to predict pressure ulcer in orthopedics inpatients.
出处 《滨州医学院学报》 2013年第1期13-15,共3页 Journal of Binzhou Medical University
关键词 压力性溃疡 危险性评估 骨科患者 住院病人 Pressure ulcer, Risk assessment, Orthopedic patients, Inpatients
  • 相关文献

参考文献14

  • 1崔亚林,周春霞,孙网风.骨科压疮危险因素量化评估表的设计与临床应用[J].护理研究(上旬版),2008,22(4):895-896. 被引量:19
  • 2Defloor T, Grypdonck MF. Pressure ulcers : validation of two risk as- sessment scales [ J ]. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 2005,14 ( 3 ) : 373- 382. 被引量:1
  • 3Chan WH,Chow KW,French P,et al. Which pressure sore risk cal- culator? A study of the effectiveness of the Norton scale in Hongkong [J]. Journal of Nursing Standard,1997,34(2) :165-169. 被引量:1
  • 4Anthony D, Reynolds T, Russell L. A regression analysis of the Waterlow score in pressure ulcer risk assessment[ J]. Clini~cal Rehabili- tation, 2003,17 ( 2 ) : 216 -223. 被引量:1
  • 5Norton D. Norton revised risk sores [ J ]. Nursing Times, 1987,83 (41) :6. 被引量:1
  • 6Bergstrom N, Braden B J, Laguzza A, et al. The Braden Scale for pre- dicting pressure sore risk[ J]. Nurs Res, 1987,36(4) :205-210. 被引量:1
  • 7Waterlow J. Pressure sores : A risk assessment card [ J ]. Nurs Times, 1985,81(48) :49-55. 被引量:1
  • 8王彩凤.压疮危险评估相关国外实践指南比较[J].中国护理管理,2011,11(3):80-83. 被引量:24
  • 9NPUAP National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel staging report[ EB/ OL]. (2006-6-20) [2011-5-12]. http://www. NPUap. org. 被引量:1
  • 10Rademakers LMF, Vainas T, Zutphen SWAM, et al. Pressure ulcers and prolonged hospital stay in hip fracture patients affected by time- to-surgery[ J ]. European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surger- y,2007,3:238-244. 被引量:1

二级参考文献66

共引文献161

同被引文献77

引证文献5

二级引证文献32

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