Suppr超能文献

评估三种用于机械通气新生儿的疼痛评估量表。

Evaluation of three pain assessment scales used for ventilated neonates.

机构信息

Department of Nursing, Zhujiang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.

Department of Biostatistics, College of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.

出版信息

J Clin Nurs. 2018 Oct;27(19-20):3522-3529. doi: 10.1111/jocn.14585. Epub 2018 Jul 27.

Abstract

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To compare and evaluate the reliability, validity, feasibility, clinical utility, and nurses' preference of the Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised, the Neonatal Pain, Agitation, and Sedation Scale, and the Neonatal Infant Acute Pain Assessment Scale used for procedural pain in ventilated neonates.

BACKGROUND

Procedural pain is a common phenomenon but is undermanaged and underassessed in hospitalised neonates. Information for clinician selecting pain measurements to improve neonatal care and outcomes is still limited.

DESIGN

A prospective observational study was used.

METHODS

A total of 1,080 pain assessments were made at 90 neonates by two nurses independently, using three scales viewing three phases of videotaped painful (arterial blood sampling) and nonpainful procedures (diaper change). Internal consistency, inter-rater reliability, discriminant validity, concurrent validity and convergent validity of scales were analysed. Feasibility, clinical utility and nurses' preference of scales were also investigated.

RESULTS

All three scales showed excellent inter-rater coefficients (from 0.991-0.992) and good internal consistency (0.733 for the Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised, 0.837 for the Neonatal Pain, Agitation, and Sedation Scale and 0.836 for the Neonatal Infant Acute Pain Assessment Scale, respectively). Scores of painful and nonpainful procedures on the three scales changed significantly across the phases. There was a strong correlation between the three scales with adequate limits of agreement. The mean scores of the Neonatal Pain, Agitation, and Sedation Scale for feasibility and utility were significantly higher than those of the Neonatal Infant Acute Pain Assessment Scale, but not significantly higher than those of the Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised. The Neonatal Pain, Agitation, and Sedation Scale was mostly preferred by 55.9% of the nurses, followed by the Neonatal Infant Acute Pain Assessment Scale (23.5%) and the Premature Infant Pain Profile-Revised (20.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

The three scales are all reliable and valid, but the Neonatal Pain, Agitation, and Sedation Scale and the Neonatal Infant Acute Pain Assessment Scale perform better in reliability. The Neonatal Pain, Agitation, and Sedation Scale appears to be a better choice for frontier nurses to assess procedural pain in ventilated neonates based on its good feasibility, utility and nurses' preference.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Choosing a valid, reliable, feasible and practical measurement is the key step for better management of procedural pain for ventilated newborns. Using the right and suitable tool is helpful to accurately identify pain, ultimately improve the neonatal care and outcomes.

摘要

目的和目标

比较和评估经修订的早产儿疼痛特征量表、新生儿疼痛、躁动和镇静量表以及新生儿急性疼痛评估量表在有创性疼痛中的可靠性、有效性、可行性、临床实用性和护士偏好。

背景

在住院新生儿中,操作性疼痛是一种常见现象,但管理和评估不足。用于选择改善新生儿护理和结局的疼痛测量的信息仍然有限。

设计

采用前瞻性观察性研究。

方法

使用三个量表在 90 名新生儿的 1080 次疼痛评估中,由两名护士独立进行,观察三个阶段的录像疼痛(动脉采血)和非疼痛程序(换尿布)。分析了量表的内部一致性、评分者间信度、判别效度、同时效度和收敛效度。还调查了量表的可行性、临床实用性和护士偏好。

结果

三个量表的评分者间系数均为 0.991-0.992,内部一致性良好(经修订的早产儿疼痛特征量表为 0.733,新生儿疼痛、躁动和镇静量表为 0.837,新生儿急性疼痛评估量表为 0.836)。三个量表的疼痛和非疼痛程序的评分在各阶段均有显著变化。三个量表之间具有很强的相关性,且一致性良好。新生儿疼痛、躁动和镇静量表的可行性和实用性平均得分明显高于新生儿急性疼痛评估量表,但与经修订的早产儿疼痛特征量表无显著差异。新生儿疼痛、躁动和镇静量表最受 55.9%护士的欢迎,其次是新生儿急性疼痛评估量表(23.5%)和经修订的早产儿疼痛特征量表(20.6%)。

结论

三个量表均可靠有效,但新生儿疼痛、躁动和镇静量表和新生儿急性疼痛评估量表在可靠性方面表现更好。基于良好的可行性、实用性和护士偏好,新生儿疼痛、躁动和镇静量表似乎是评估有创性疼痛的更好选择。

临床意义

选择有效的、可靠的、可行的和实用的测量方法是更好地管理有创性疼痛的关键步骤。使用正确合适的工具有助于准确识别疼痛,最终改善新生儿护理和结局。

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