Suppr超能文献

高级笔式电筒的效果评估。

The effect evaluation of advanced penlight.

机构信息

Department of Nursing, National Taipei University of Nursing and Health Sciences, Taipei City, Taiwan.

Department of Nursing, Mackay Medicine, Nursing and Management College, Taipei City, Taiwan.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2018 Nov 7;13(11):e0205978. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0205978. eCollection 2018.

Abstract

Pupil diameter measurement is crucial for physical assessment and disease monitoring in a health and nursing care situation. A general penlights (GPLs) is frequently used and allow for an approximate and indirect measurement of the pupil diameter. Health caregivers or nurses generally have less confidence in the value of the pupil diameter measured using the GPL. The Advanced Penlight (APL) is a new device designed for accurate measurement of the pupil diameter. The purpose of the presented research was to compare the accuracies and operational times of the pupil diameter measurements by means of the GPL and APL. One-group post-test and single-blind study designed was used in this study. The innovation of the APL is the addition of a perspective measurement ruler (PMR) attached to one side of the penlight that allows precise measurement of the pupil diameter before and after pupillary contraction. The PMR can be rotated by any angle for adaptation to the measurement conditions. After standard pupil diameter measurements by a refractometer (RM) were performed on a subjects, ninety study participants measured the pupil diameters of the same subject separately by the GPL and APL. A self-administered questionnaire was used to assess the opinions of the participants after using the GPL compare to the APL. The mean age of the participants was 20.01 (SD = 0.47) years and 83% of them were female senior nursing students. There were no statistically significant differences between the average values of pupil diameters measured by the APL and the RM. Compared to the GPL, the pupil diameter measured by APL was much similar to the RM measurement. The average operational time was 8.72 seconds shorter (t = -3.81, p = 0.001) for the APL measurement compared to the GPL measurement. The average scores of convenience and confidence on pupil diameter measurements of questionnaire were higher for the APL compared to the GPL. The APL can increase the accuracy and save operating time of pupil diameter measurement and thereby promote the quality of health assessment and nursing care practice.

摘要

瞳孔直径测量在健康和护理环境中的身体评估和疾病监测中至关重要。通常使用通用笔灯 (GPL) 进行间接测量,以粗略估计瞳孔直径。医护人员通常对使用 GPL 测量的瞳孔直径值的准确性不太有信心。新型高级笔灯 (APL) 是专门设计用于精确测量瞳孔直径的设备。本研究旨在比较 GPL 和 APL 测量瞳孔直径的准确性和操作时间。本研究采用单组后测试和单盲设计。APL 的创新之处在于在灯的一侧添加了一个附加的视角测量尺 (PMR),可以在瞳孔收缩前后精确测量瞳孔直径。PMR 可以旋转任意角度以适应测量条件。在对受测者进行了折射仪 (RM) 标准瞳孔直径测量后,九十名研究参与者分别使用 GPL 和 APL 对同一受测者的瞳孔直径进行了测量。使用 GPL 后,参与者使用自我管理的问卷评估了他们对 APL 的意见。参与者的平均年龄为 20.01 岁(SD=0.47),其中 83%为女性高级护理学生。APL 测量的瞳孔直径平均值与 RM 测量值之间没有统计学差异。与 GPL 相比,APL 测量的瞳孔直径与 RM 测量值更相似。与 GPL 相比,APL 测量的平均操作时间短 8.72 秒(t=-3.81,p=0.001)。与 GPL 相比,APL 对瞳孔直径测量的便利性和信心的平均评分更高。APL 可以提高瞳孔直径测量的准确性并节省操作时间,从而提高健康评估和护理实践的质量。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b7b4/6221280/b4febbf58f0a/pone.0205978.g001.jpg

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