Suppr超能文献

直观意识镇静评分工具的有效性和可靠性:镇静沟通的护理工具。

Validity and reliability of an intuitive conscious sedation scoring tool: the nursing instrument for the communication of sedation.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.

出版信息

Crit Care Med. 2010 Aug;38(8):1674-84. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181e7c73e.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To develop a symmetrical 7-level scale (+3, "dangerously agitated" to -3, "deeply sedated") that is both intuitive and easy to use, the Nursing Instrument for the Communication of Sedation (NICS).

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

University medical center.

PATIENTS

Mixed surgical, medical intensive care unit (ICU) population.

INTERVENTIONS

Patient assessment.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Criterion, construct, face validity, and interrater reliability of NICS over time and comparison of ease of use and nursing preference between NICS and four common intensive care unit sedation scales. A total of 395 observations were performed in 104 patients (20 intubated [INT], 84 non intubated) by 59 intensive care unit providers. Criterion validity was tested comparing NICS WITH the 8-point level of arousal scale, demonstrating excellent correlation (rs = .96 overall, .95 non intubated, 0.85 intubated, all p < .001). Construct validity was confirmed by comparing NICS with the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale, demonstrating excellent correlation (rs = .98, p < .001). Face validity was determined in a blinded survey of 53 intensive care unit nurses evaluating NICS and four other sedation scales. NICS was highly rated as easy to score, intuitive, and a clinically relevant measure of sedation, and agitation and was preferred overall (74% NICS, 17% Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale, 11% Other, p < .001 NICS vs. Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale). Interrater reliability was assessed, using the five scales at three timed intervals, during which 37% of patients received sedative medication. The mean NICS score consistently correlated with each of the other scales over time with an rs of >.9. Using the intraclass correlation coefficient as a measure of Interrater reliability, NICS scored as high, or higher than Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale, Riker Sedation-Agitation Scale, Motor Activity Assessment Scale, or Ramsay over the three time periods.

CONCLUSION

NICS is a valid and reliable sedation scale for use in a mixed population of intensive care unit patients. NICS ranked highest in nursing preference and ease of communication and may thus permit more effective and interactive management of sedation.

摘要

目的

开发一种对称的 7 级量表(+3,“极度激动”至-3,“深度镇静”),既直观又易于使用,即护理镇静沟通工具(NICS)。

设计

前瞻性队列研究。

设置

大学医学中心。

患者

混合外科、内科重症监护病房(ICU)人群。

干预措施

患者评估。

测量和主要结果

NICS 的时间内的标准、结构、表面有效性和组内信度,以及与四种常见 ICU 镇静量表相比,NICS 的易用性和护理偏好的比较。共对 104 例患者(20 例插管[INT],84 例非插管)中的 395 例观察进行了 59 名重症监护病房提供者的评估。通过 NICS 与 8 级觉醒量表进行比较来测试标准效度,结果显示相关性极好(总体 rs =.96,非插管 rs =.95,插管 rs =.85,所有 p <.001)。通过将 NICS 与 Richmond 躁动-镇静量表进行比较来确认结构效度,结果显示相关性极好(rs =.98,p <.001)。通过对 53 名 ICU 护士进行的关于 NICS 和其他四种镇静量表的盲法调查来确定表面有效性。NICS 被评为易于评分、直观、且是镇静和躁动的临床相关测量工具,总体上更受青睐(74%NICS,17%Richmond 躁动-镇静量表,11%其他,p <.001 NICS 与 Richmond 躁动-镇静量表)。通过在三个时间间隔内使用五种量表评估组内信度,在此期间 37%的患者接受了镇静药物治疗。NICS 评分随着时间的推移始终与其他量表的评分高度相关,rs 大于>.9。使用组内相关系数作为组内信度的衡量标准,NICS 在三个时间段内的评分均高于或高于 Richmond 躁动-镇静量表、Riker 镇静-躁动量表、运动活动评估量表或 Ramsay。

结论

NICS 是一种适用于混合 ICU 患者人群的有效且可靠的镇静量表。NICS 在护理偏好和沟通便利性方面排名最高,因此可能允许更有效地进行镇静管理和互动。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验