[压力性溃疡风险评估量表预测效度的比较研究]

[A comparative study on the predictive validity among pressure ulcer risk assessment scales].

作者信息

Lee Young-Hee, Jeong Ihn-Sook, Jeon Seong-Sook

机构信息

Department of Nursing, College of Medicine, Pusan National University, Korea.

出版信息

Taehan Kanho Hakhoe Chi. 2003 Apr;33(2):162-9. doi: 10.4040/jkan.2003.33.2.162.

DOI:10.4040/jkan.2003.33.2.162

PMID:15314444

Abstract

PURPOSE

This study was to compare the predictive validity of Norton Scale(1962), Cubbin & Jackson Scale(1991), and Song & Choi Scale(1991).

METHOD

Data were collected three times per week from 48-72 hours after admission based on the four pressure sore risk assessment scales and a skin assessment tool for pressure sore on 112 intensive care unit(ICU) patients in a educational hospital Ulsan during Dec, 11, 2000 to Feb, 10, 2001. Four indices of validity and area under the curve(AUC) of receiver operating characteristic(ROC) were calculated.

RESULT

Based on the cut off point presented by the developer, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value were as follows : Norton Scale : 97%, 18%, 35%, 93% respectively; Cubbin & Jackson Scale : 89%, 61%, 51%, 92%, respectively; and Song & Choi Scale : 100%, 18%, 36%, 100% respectively. Area under the curves(AUC) of receiver operating characteristic(ROC) were Norton Scale.737, Cubbin & Jackson Scale.826, Song & Choi Scale.683.

CONCLUSION

The Cubbin & Jackson Scale was found to be the most valid pressure sore risk assessment tool. Further studies on patients with chronic conditions may be helpful to validate this finding.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较诺顿量表（1962年）、卡宾与杰克逊量表（1991年）以及宋与崔量表（1991年）的预测效度。

方法

在2000年12月11日至2001年2月10日期间，对蔚山某教学医院112名重症监护病房（ICU）患者，基于四种压疮风险评估量表和一种压疮皮肤评估工具，在入院后48 - 72小时内每周收集三次数据。计算了效度的四个指标以及受试者工作特征曲线（ROC）下的面积（AUC）。

结果

根据开发者给出的截断点，敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值如下：诺顿量表：分别为97%、18%、35%、93%；卡宾与杰克逊量表：分别为89%、61%、51%、92%；宋与崔量表：分别为100%、18%、36%、100%。受试者工作特征曲线（ROC）下的面积（AUC）分别为：诺顿量表0.737、卡宾与杰克逊量表0.826、宋与崔量表0.683。