医学
克朗巴赫阿尔法
新生儿重症监护室
预测值
预测效度
风险评估
可靠性(半导体)
重症监护室
比例(比率)
重症监护
急诊医学
重症监护医学
儿科
内科学
心理测量学
临床心理学
功率(物理)
物理
计算机安全
量子力学
计算机科学
作者
Zhenjie Shi,Xiaowen Li
摘要
Abstract To compare the predictive ability and reliability of two pressure injury (PI) assessment tools, the Neonatal/Infant(N/I) Braden Q and Braden QD scale, in neonates. A prospective and cross‐sectional study. This study was conducted in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) of a tertiary‐level university hospital in China between April and June 2023. A total of 410 patients were included in this study. Risk assessment was performed with the N/I Braden Q scale, followed immediately with the Braden QD scale once daily. Risk assessment was terminated when the PI developed or the patient was discharged from the NICU or died. Each patient's final risk assessment was considered in the data analysis. The area under the curve (AUC) of the two scales was 0.879 and 0.857, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and Cronbach's α coefficient of the N/I Braden Q Scale scores were 0.844, 0.833, 0.30, 0.984 and 0.806, respectively. The Braden QD scale scores were 0.938, 0.733, 0.229, 0.993 and 0.727, respectively. Both scales are valid and reliable in predicting the risk of PI in the NICU. The N/I Braden Q Scale was better to distinguish patients at PI risk and not at PI risk than the Braden QD scale. The literature is limited on this topic. This study provides insight into the comparison of different pressure injury risk assessment scales. The findings of this study may guide nurses to choose a suitable tool to assess the risk of pressure injury in neonates.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI