Chelsea and Westminster NHS Foundation Trust, 369 Fulham Road, London SW10 9NH, UK.
Physiotherapy. 2013 Mar;99(1):33-41. doi: 10.1016/j.physio.2012.01.003. Epub 2012 Mar 30.
To develop a scoring system to measure physical morbidity in critical care - the Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment Tool (CPAx).
The development process was iterative involving content validity indices (CVI), a focus group and an observational study of 33 patients to test construct validity against the Medical Research Council score for muscle strength, peak cough flow, Australian Therapy Outcome Measures score, Glasgow Coma Scale score, Bloomsbury sedation score, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, Short Form 36 (SF-36) score, days of mechanical ventilation and inter-rater reliability.
Trauma and general critical care patients from two London teaching hospitals.
Users of the CPAx felt that it possessed content validity, giving a final CVI of 1.00 (P<0.05). Construct validation data showed moderate to strong significant correlations between the CPAx score and all secondary measures, apart from the mental component of the SF-36 which demonstrated weak correlation with the CPAx score (r=0.024, P=0.720). Reliability testing showed internal consistency of α=0.798 and inter-rater reliability of κ=0.988 (95% confidence interval 0.791 to 1.000) between five raters.
This pilot work supports proof of concept of the CPAx as a measure of physical morbidity in the critical care population, and is a cogent argument for further investigation of the scoring system.
开发一种评分系统来衡量重症监护中的身体发病率 - 切尔西重症监护身体评估工具(CPAx)。
开发过程是迭代的,涉及内容有效性指数(CVI)、焦点小组和对 33 名患者的观察性研究,以针对肌肉力量的医疗研究委员会评分、峰值咳嗽流量、澳大利亚治疗结果衡量标准、格拉斯哥昏迷评分、布卢姆斯伯里镇静评分、序贯器官衰竭评估评分、短格式 36 项(SF-36)评分、机械通气天数和评分者间可靠性来测试构建有效性。
来自伦敦两家教学医院的创伤和普通重症监护患者。
CPAx 的使用者认为它具有内容有效性,最终 CVI 为 1.00(P<0.05)。构建有效性数据显示,CPAx 评分与所有次要指标之间存在中度至强显著相关性,除了 SF-36 的心理成分与 CPAx 评分呈弱相关(r=0.024,P=0.720)。可靠性测试显示 5 位评分者之间的内部一致性为α=0.798,评分者间可靠性为κ=0.988(95%置信区间 0.791 至 1.000)。
这项初步工作支持了 CPAx 作为重症监护人群身体发病率衡量标准的概念验证,并且有力地证明了对评分系统进行进一步研究的必要性。