Suppr超能文献

皮肤撕裂风险评估工具的开发与测试。

The development and testing of a skin tear risk assessment tool.

机构信息

Research Department, Silver Chain Group, Osborne Park, WA, Australia.

School of Nursing and Midwifery, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia.

出版信息

Int Wound J. 2017 Feb;14(1):97-103. doi: 10.1111/iwj.12561. Epub 2015 Dec 22.

Abstract

The aim of the present study is to develop a reliable and valid skin tear risk assessment tool. The six characteristics identified in a previous case control study as constituting the best risk model for skin tear development were used to construct a risk assessment tool. The ability of the tool to predict skin tear development was then tested in a prospective study. Between August 2012 and September 2013, 1466 tertiary hospital patients were assessed at admission and followed up for 10 days to see if they developed a skin tear. The predictive validity of the tool was assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. When the tool was found not to have performed as well as hoped, secondary analyses were performed to determine whether a potentially better performing risk model could be identified. The tool was found to have high sensitivity but low specificity and therefore have inadequate predictive validity. Secondary analysis of the combined data from this and the previous case control study identified an alternative better performing risk model. The tool developed and tested in this study was found to have inadequate predictive validity. The predictive validity of an alternative, more parsimonious model now needs to be tested.

摘要

本研究旨在开发一种可靠且有效的皮肤撕裂风险评估工具。之前的病例对照研究中确定的六个构成皮肤撕裂最佳风险模型的特征被用于构建风险评估工具。然后,在一项前瞻性研究中测试了该工具预测皮肤撕裂发展的能力。在 2012 年 8 月至 2013 年 9 月期间,对 1466 名三级医院患者进行了入院评估,并进行了 10 天的随访,以观察他们是否发生了皮肤撕裂。使用接收者操作特征 (ROC) 分析评估了工具的预测有效性。当发现该工具的表现不如预期时,进行了二次分析以确定是否可以确定一种表现更好的风险模型。该工具具有较高的敏感性但特异性较低,因此预测有效性不足。对本研究和之前病例对照研究的合并数据进行的二次分析确定了另一种表现更好的风险模型。本研究中开发和测试的工具被发现预测有效性不足。现在需要测试另一种更简洁、更有效的预测模型的预测有效性。

相似文献

1
The development and testing of a skin tear risk assessment tool.
Int Wound J. 2017 Feb;14(1):97-103. doi: 10.1111/iwj.12561. Epub 2015 Dec 22.
2
A risk model for the prediction of skin tears in aged care residents: A prospective cohort study.
Int Wound J. 2019 Feb;16(1):52-63. doi: 10.1111/iwj.12985. Epub 2018 Sep 2.
4
Risk scoring tool for forearm skin tears in Japanese older adults: A prospective cohort study.
J Tissue Viability. 2021 May;30(2):155-160. doi: 10.1016/j.jtv.2021.02.010. Epub 2021 Mar 2.
5
Models for predicting skin tears: A comparison.
Int Wound J. 2020 Jun;17(3):823-830. doi: 10.1111/iwj.13340. Epub 2020 Mar 15.
8
9
The prevalence of skin tears in the acute care setting in Singapore.
Int Wound J. 2016 Oct;13(5):977-83. doi: 10.1111/iwj.12572. Epub 2016 Feb 2.
10
Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the Spanish version of the Neonatal Skin Risk Assessment Scale.
J Nurs Manag. 2018 Sep;26(6):744-756. doi: 10.1111/jonm.12612. Epub 2018 Apr 14.

引用本文的文献

2
Skin tears in older patients in intensive care units: A multicentre point prevalence study.
Nurs Crit Care. 2025 Mar;30(2):e13131. doi: 10.1111/nicc.13131. Epub 2024 Jul 20.
3
Models for predicting skin tears: A comparison.
Int Wound J. 2020 Jun;17(3):823-830. doi: 10.1111/iwj.13340. Epub 2020 Mar 15.
4
A risk model for the prediction of skin tears in aged care residents: A prospective cohort study.
Int Wound J. 2019 Feb;16(1):52-63. doi: 10.1111/iwj.12985. Epub 2018 Sep 2.
5
Skin tears and risk factors assessment: a systematic review on evidence-based medicine.
Int Wound J. 2018 Feb;15(1):38-42. doi: 10.1111/iwj.12815. Epub 2017 Oct 17.

本文引用的文献

3
Systematic review of the use of prophylactic dressings in the prevention of pressure ulcers.
Int Wound J. 2014 Oct;11(5):460-71. doi: 10.1111/iwj.12212. Epub 2014 Jan 29.
5
Skin tears: care and management of the older adult at home.
Home Healthc Nurse. 2013 Feb;31(2):90-101; quiz 102-3. doi: 10.1097/NHH.0b013e31827f458a.
6
Skin tears: state of the science: consensus statements for the prevention, prediction, assessment, and treatment of skin tears©.
Adv Skin Wound Care. 2011 Sep;24(9 Suppl):2-15. doi: 10.1097/01.ASW.0000405316.99011.95.
7
Pressure ulcers: effectiveness of risk-assessment tools. A randomised controlled trial (the ULCER trial).
BMJ Qual Saf. 2011 Apr;20(4):297-306. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs.2010.043109. Epub 2011 Jan 24.
8
The impact of pressure ulcer risk assessment on patient outcomes among hospitalised patients.
J Clin Nurs. 2009 Jul;18(13):1923-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2008.02717.x. Epub 2009 Apr 3.
9
An interrater reliability study of the Braden scale in two nursing homes.
Int J Nurs Stud. 2008 Oct;45(10):1501-11. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2008.02.007.
10
Skin tears: a review of the evidence to support prevention and treatment.
Ostomy Wound Manage. 2007 Mar;53(3):32-4, 36, 38-40 passim.

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