• 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

重症护理转运中疼痛评估率的基准测试

Benchmarking Pain Assessment Rate in Critical Care Transport.

作者信息

Reichert Ryan J, Gothard M David, Schwartz Hamilton P, Bigham Michael T

机构信息

Pediatric Resident, Akron Children's Hospital, Akron, OH.

Statitician, BIOSTATS, Inc, East Canton, OH.

出版信息

Air Med J. 2016 Nov-Dec;35(6):344-347. doi: 10.1016/j.amj.2016.07.001. Epub 2016 Oct 25.

DOI:10.1016/j.amj.2016.07.001
PMID:27894556
Abstract

The purpose of this study is to determine the rate of pain assessment in pediatric neonatal critical care transport (PNCCT). The GAMUT database was interrogated for an 18-month period and excluded programs with less than 10% pediatric or neonatal patient contacts and less than 3 months of any metric data reporting during the study period. We hypothesized pain assessment during PNCCT is superior to prehospital pain assessment rates, although inferior to in-hospital rates. Sixty-two programs representing 104,445 patient contacts were analyzed. A total of 21,693 (20.8%) patients were reported to have a documented pain assessment. Subanalysis identified 17 of the 62 programs consistently reporting pain assessments. This group accounted for 24,599 patients and included 7,273 (29.6%) neonatal, 12,655 (51.5%) pediatric, and 4,664 (19.0%) adult patients. Among these programs, the benchmark rate of pain assessment was 90.0%. Our analysis shows a rate below emergency medical services and consistent with published hospital rates of pain assessment. Poor rates of tracking of this metric among participating programs was noted, suggesting an opportunity to investigate the barriers to documentation and reporting of pain assessments in PNCCT and a potential quality improvement initiative.

摘要

本研究的目的是确定儿科新生儿重症监护转运(PNCCT)中的疼痛评估率。对GAMUT数据库进行了为期18个月的查询,排除了儿科或新生儿患者接触率低于10%以及在研究期间任何指标数据报告少于3个月的项目。我们假设PNCCT期间的疼痛评估优于院前疼痛评估率,尽管低于院内评估率。对代表104445次患者接触的62个项目进行了分析。共有21693名(20.8%)患者被报告有记录在案的疼痛评估。亚分析确定62个项目中有17个持续报告疼痛评估。该组包括24599名患者,其中新生儿7273名(29.6%)、儿科患者12655名(51.5%)、成人患者4664名(19.0%)。在这些项目中,疼痛评估的基准率为90.0%。我们的分析显示该比率低于紧急医疗服务机构,且与已公布的医院疼痛评估率一致。注意到参与项目中该指标的跟踪率较低,这表明有机会调查PNCCT中疼痛评估记录和报告的障碍以及潜在的质量改进举措。

相似文献

1
Benchmarking Pain Assessment Rate in Critical Care Transport.重症护理转运中疼痛评估率的基准测试
Air Med J. 2016 Nov-Dec;35(6):344-347. doi: 10.1016/j.amj.2016.07.001. Epub 2016 Oct 25.
2
Quality metrics in neonatal and pediatric critical care transport: a consensus statement.新生儿和儿科危重症转运中的质量指标:共识声明。
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2013 Jun;14(5):518-24. doi: 10.1097/PCC.0b013e31828a7fc1.
3
Differences in Prehospital Patient Assessments for Pediatric Versus Adult Patients.儿科与成人患者院前评估的差异。
J Pediatr. 2018 Aug;199:200-205.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2018.03.069. Epub 2018 May 11.
4
Intubation Success in Critical Care Transport: A Multicenter Study.重症监护转运中的插管成功率:一项多中心研究。
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2018 Sep-Oct;22(5):571-577. doi: 10.1080/10903127.2017.1419324. Epub 2018 Feb 21.
5
Intubation in Pediatric/Neonatal Critical Care Transport: National Performance.儿科/新生儿重症监护转运中的插管:全国情况
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2015 Jul-Sep;19(3):351-7. doi: 10.3109/10903127.2014.980481. Epub 2015 Feb 9.
6
Minimum standards for intrahospital transport of critically ill patients.重症患者院内转运的最低标准。
Emerg Med (Fremantle). 2003 Apr;15(2):202-4.
7
Quality Metrics in Neonatal and Pediatric Critical Care Transport: A National Delphi Project.新生儿及儿科重症监护转运中的质量指标:一项全国性德尔菲项目
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2015 Oct;16(8):711-7. doi: 10.1097/PCC.0000000000000477.
8
Paramedics accurately apply the pediatric assessment triangle to drive management.护理人员准确应用儿科评估三角来指导治疗。
Prehosp Emerg Care. 2014 Oct-Dec;18(4):520-30. doi: 10.3109/10903127.2014.912706. Epub 2014 May 15.
9
Minimum standards for transport of critically ill patients.危重症患者转运的最低标准。
Emerg Med (Fremantle). 2003 Apr;15(2):197-201.
10
Missed opportunities during pediatric residency training: report of a 10-year follow-up survey in critical care transport medicine.儿科住院医师培训期间错失的机会:危重症转运医学10年随访调查结果报告
Pediatr Emerg Care. 2012 Jan;28(1):1-5. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0b013e31823ed4ab.