• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

开发和验证一种用于急性住院患者的压疮风险评估工具。

Development and validation of a pressure ulcer risk assessment tool for acute hospital patients.

机构信息

St Vincent's Centre for Nursing Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

出版信息

Wound Repair Regen. 2011 Jan-Feb;19(1):31-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-475X.2010.00647.x. Epub 2010 Dec 6.

DOI:10.1111/j.1524-475X.2010.00647.x
PMID:21134037
Abstract

The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a pressure ulcer risk assessment for acute hospitals. This tool was developed in a cohort of 342 patients with a mean age 63 years (SD 19.82) and validated in a second cohort of 165 patients with a mean age 68 years (SD 18.40). Risk factors for inclusion on The Northern Hospital Pressure Ulcer Prevention Plan (TNH-PUPP) were identified from the literature then examined and weighted using logistic regression. Risk factors included on the TNH-PUPP were requires assistance to move in bed (odds ratio [OR] 5.15; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.49-10.65), admission to intensive care during current admission (OR 2.98; 95% CI: 1.33-6.67), aged ≥ 65 years (OR 2.81; 95% CI: 1.24-6.36), reduced sensation (OR 2.29; 95% CI: 1.19-4.42), and cognitive impairment (OR 2.26; 95% CI: 1.09-4.67). The TNH-PUPP was validated in a prospective sample. The new tool had high diagnostic validity (area under the receiver operating curve=0.86), consistent in the validation sample (area under the receiver operating curve=0.90). The TNH-PUPP has a moderate positive predictive value (development=0.50; validation=0.13), and a high negative predictive value (development=0.94; validation=0.99) enabling low-risk patients to be screened out, as noncandidates for pressure ulcer prevention interventions. An accurate pressure ulcer risk assessment has been developed and validated, which identifies a high-risk group to whom limited pressure ulcer prevention resources should be directed. The TNH-PUPP facilitates effective resource allocation and is likely to reduce unnecessary patient harm and costs from pressure ulcers in acute hospitals.

摘要

本研究旨在开发和验证一种适用于急性医院的压疮风险评估工具。该工具在 342 名平均年龄为 63 岁(标准差 19.82)的患者队列中进行开发,并在 165 名平均年龄为 68 岁(标准差 18.40)的患者队列中进行验证。从文献中确定了纳入《北方医院压疮预防计划》(TNH-PUPP)的危险因素,然后使用逻辑回归进行了检查和加权。纳入 TNH-PUPP 的危险因素包括需要协助在床上移动(优势比[OR]5.15;95%置信区间[CI]:2.49-10.65)、当前入院期间入住重症监护病房(OR 2.98;95% CI:1.33-6.67)、年龄≥65 岁(OR 2.81;95% CI:1.24-6.36)、感觉减退(OR 2.29;95% CI:1.19-4.42)和认知障碍(OR 2.26;95% CI:1.09-4.67)。该工具在前瞻性样本中得到验证。新工具具有较高的诊断准确性(受试者工作特征曲线下面积=0.86),在验证样本中一致(受试者工作特征曲线下面积=0.90)。TNH-PUPP 具有中等阳性预测值(开发=0.50;验证=0.13)和高阴性预测值(开发=0.94;验证=0.99),能够筛选出低风险患者,使他们不适合接受压疮预防干预。已经开发和验证了一种准确的压疮风险评估工具,该工具确定了一个高风险群体,应将有限的压疮预防资源集中在该群体上。TNH-PUPP 有助于有效分配资源,并可能减少急性医院中不必要的患者压疮伤害和成本。

相似文献

1
Development and validation of a pressure ulcer risk assessment tool for acute hospital patients.开发和验证一种用于急性住院患者的压疮风险评估工具。
Wound Repair Regen. 2011 Jan-Feb;19(1):31-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-475X.2010.00647.x. Epub 2010 Dec 6.
2
Development of a new risk assessment scale for predicting pressure ulcers in an intensive care unit.一种用于预测重症监护病房压疮的新风险评估量表的开发。
Nurs Crit Care. 2008 Jan-Feb;13(1):34-43. doi: 10.1111/j.1478-5153.2007.00250.x.
3
Pressure Ulcer Prevention Program Study: a randomized, controlled prospective comparative value evaluation of 2 pressure ulcer prevention strategies in nursing and rehabilitation centers.压力性溃疡预防计划研究:对护理和康复中心 2 种压力性溃疡预防策略的随机、对照、前瞻性比较价值评估。
Adv Skin Wound Care. 2012 Oct;25(10):450-64. doi: 10.1097/01.ASW.0000421461.21773.32.
4
The Braden Scale cannot be used alone for assessing pressure ulcer risk in surgical patients: a meta-analysis.布拉登量表不能单独用于评估外科手术患者发生压疮的风险:一项荟萃分析。
Ostomy Wound Manage. 2012 Feb;58(2):34-40.
5
Assessing predictive validity of the modified Braden scale for prediction of pressure ulcer risk of orthopaedic patients in an acute care setting.评估改良版Braden量表在急性护理环境中对骨科患者压疮风险预测的预测效度。
J Clin Nurs. 2009 Jun;18(11):1565-73. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2008.02757.x.
6
Skin alterations of intact skin and risk factors associated with pressure ulcer development in surgical patients: a cohort study.手术患者完整皮肤的改变及与压疮发生相关的危险因素:一项队列研究
Int J Nurs Stud. 2007 Jul;44(5):655-63. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2006.02.010. Epub 2006 Apr 24.
7
Prevalence of pressure ulcers in three university teaching hospitals in Ireland.爱尔兰三家大学教学医院中压疮的患病率。
J Tissue Viability. 2008 Nov;17(4):103-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jtv.2007.12.001. Epub 2008 Apr 18.
8
Development and validation of a general population renal risk score.一般人群肾脏风险评分的制定和验证。
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2011 Jul;6(7):1731-8. doi: 10.2215/CJN.08590910.
9
A comparison of Braden Q, Garvin and Glamorgan risk assessment scales in paediatrics.布拉登 Q 量表、加文量表和格拉摩根量表在儿科中的比较。
J Tissue Viability. 2010 Aug;19(3):98-105. doi: 10.1016/j.jtv.2010.03.001. Epub 2010 Apr 24.
10
Predicting the likelihood of emergency admission to hospital of older people: development and validation of the Emergency Admission Risk Likelihood Index (EARLI).预测老年人紧急入院的可能性:紧急入院风险可能性指数(EARLI)的开发与验证。
Fam Pract. 2007 Apr;24(2):158-67. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cml069. Epub 2007 Jan 8.

引用本文的文献

1
Risk prediction tools for pressure injury occurrence: an umbrella review of systematic reviews reporting model development and validation methods.压力性损伤发生风险预测工具:对报告模型开发与验证方法的系统评价的伞状综述
Diagn Progn Res. 2025 Jan 14;9(1):2. doi: 10.1186/s41512-024-00182-4.
2
Evaluation of the effectiveness of a comprehensive care plan to reduce hospital acquired complications in an Australian hospital: protocol for a mixed-method preimplementation and postimplementation study.评价综合护理计划在减少澳大利亚某医院获得性并发症方面的有效性:一项混合方法预实施和后实施研究的方案。
BMJ Open. 2020 Jul 20;10(7):e034121. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034121.
3
Clinical evaluation of a new pressure ulcer risk assessment instrument, the Pressure Ulcer Risk Primary or Secondary Evaluation Tool (PURPOSE T).
新型压疮风险评估工具——压疮风险初级或次级评估工具(PURPOSE T)的临床评估。
J Adv Nurs. 2018 Feb;74(2):407-424. doi: 10.1111/jan.13444. Epub 2017 Sep 28.
4
Using cognitive pre-testing methods in the development of a new evidenced-based pressure ulcer risk assessment instrument.在开发一种新的基于证据的压疮风险评估工具时使用认知预测试方法。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016 Nov 16;16(1):158. doi: 10.1186/s12874-016-0257-5.
5
Assessing Predictive Validity of Pressure Ulcer Risk Scales- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.评估压疮风险量表的预测效度——一项系统评价与荟萃分析
Iran J Public Health. 2016 Feb;45(2):122-33.
6
Developing a pressure ulcer risk factor minimum data set and risk assessment framework.制定压疮危险因素最小数据集和风险评估框架。
J Adv Nurs. 2014 Oct;70(10):2339-52. doi: 10.1111/jan.12444. Epub 2014 May 21.
7
Implementation of pressure ulcer prevention best practice recommendations in acute care: an observational study.在急症护理中实施压疮预防最佳实践建议的实施情况:一项观察性研究。
Int Wound J. 2013 Jun;10(3):313-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-481X.2012.00979.x. Epub 2012 Apr 19.