• 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

评估一种新的 ICU 患者压疮风险评估量表的效度和信度。

Assessing the Validity and Reliability of a New Pressure Ulcer Risk Assessment Scale for Patients in Intensive Care Units.

机构信息

Mehmet Akif Ersoy University, Burdur, Turkey.

Ege University, İzmir, Turkey.

出版信息

Wound Manag Prev. 2020 Feb;66(2):24-33. doi: 10.25270/wmp.2020.2.2433.

DOI:10.25270/wmp.2020.2.2433
PMID:32294059
Abstract

UNLABELLED

The high incidence of pressure ulcers/injuries (PU/Is) among patients in intensive care units (ICUs) suggests a need for improved risk assessment.

PURPOSE

The study aimed to develop and assess the validity and reliability of a new PU/I risk assessment scale.

METHODS

The authors developed the Efteli Günes (EFGU) Pressure Ulcer Risk Assessment Scale based on a conceptual framework of risk factors developed by Coleman et al. These factors comprised direct (immobility, skin/PU status, poor perfusion) and indirect (poor sensory perception and response, diabetes, moisture, poor nutrition, low albumin) factors, as well as factors that could potentially influence risk (older age, medications, pitting edema, chronic wound infection, acute illness, increased body temperature. These factors were operationalized into 8 scale variables: skin status in areas exposed to pressure, discomfort and pain sensation in areas exposed to pressure, incontinence, diastolic blood pressure, age, diabetes, ability to make small position shifts in areas exposed to pressure, and skin tolerance test. The presence and/or extent of each factor was assigned a value; the total score ranged from 0 to 15, with higher values indicating increased risk. Intraclass correlation (ICC) was used to assess interrater agreement. To test the instrument's validity and reliability, a prospective, methodological study was conducted from September 1, 2015 to November 1, 2016, in the Neurology, Internal Medicine, Neurosurgery, Orthopedics, and Traumatology ICUs of a university hospital in Turkey. Eligible participants had to be bedbound ICU patients at least 18 years old, without a PU/I on admission, not receiving inotropic and/or vasopressor medications, and with a minimum ICU stay of 6 days. Demographic and clinical data were collected upon admission and daily thereafter until ICU discharge (maximum stay 12 weeks) or death. Descriptive statistics and Student's t and chi-squared tests were used to analyze the data. Reliability was determined using Cronbach's alpha. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin coefficient was used to determine validity, and the diagnostic and Youden indices were used to establish the cutoff value for risk.

RESULTS

Of the 207 patients included in this study 117 [56.5%] were male, mean age was 60.85 ± 16.45 years, the majority of participants (88 [42.5%]) were in the Neurology ICU), and 56 (27.1%) developed a PU/I. The presence of diabetes was found not to be a risk factor (r = 0.18), but the inability to make small position shifts (r = 0.79) was found to be a significant risk factor. After removing the diabetes variable (maximum score 14), 97.1% of patients with a score of 6 or greater on the EFGU scale score developed a PU/I. The Cronbach alpha coefficient for reliability was 0.81, sensitivity of the scale was 0.97, specificity was 0.83, positive predictive value was 0.69, and negative predictive value was 0.99. The ICC coefficient was 0.99.

CONCLUSIONS

The validity and reliability of the EFGU Scale seem to indicate a high predictive value for PU/I occurrence among ICU patients involved in the study. Multicenter studies involving larger samples of ICU patients are needed to validate the results.

摘要

目的

研究旨在开发并评估一种新的压疮/损伤(PU/I)风险评估量表的有效性和可靠性。

方法

作者基于 Coleman 等人提出的风险因素概念框架,制定了 Efteli Günes(EFGU)压疮风险评估量表。这些因素包括直接(活动受限、皮肤/PU 状况、灌注不良)和间接(感觉和反应迟钝、糖尿病、潮湿、营养状况不佳、白蛋白水平低)因素,以及可能影响风险的因素(年龄较大、药物治疗、凹陷性水肿、慢性伤口感染、急性疾病、体温升高)。这些因素被转化为 8 个量表变量:受压部位的皮肤状况、受压部位的不适和疼痛感觉、失禁、舒张压、年龄、糖尿病、在受压部位进行小位置转移的能力、皮肤耐受力测试。每个因素的存在和/或程度都被赋予一个值;总分范围为 0 至 15 分,分值越高表示风险越高。采用组内相关系数(ICC)评估评分者间的一致性。为了测试该工具的有效性和可靠性,我们于 2015 年 9 月 1 日至 2016 年 11 月 1 日在土耳其一所大学医院的神经科、内科、神经外科、骨科和创伤科 ICU 进行了一项前瞻性、方法学研究。符合条件的参与者必须是至少 18 岁、入院时无 PU/I、未接受正性肌力和/或血管加压药物治疗、且 ICU 入住时间至少 6 天的卧床 ICU 患者。入院时和之后每天收集人口统计学和临床数据,直至 ICU 出院(最长 12 周)或死亡。使用描述性统计和学生 t 检验和卡方检验分析数据。使用 Cronbach's alpha 评估可靠性。使用 Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin 系数评估有效性,使用诊断和 Youden 指数确定风险的截断值。

结果

这项研究共纳入 207 例患者,其中 117 例(56.5%)为男性,平均年龄为 60.85 ± 16.45 岁,大多数参与者(88 例[42.5%])来自神经科 ICU,56 例(27.1%)发生了 PU/I。研究发现,糖尿病并不是一个风险因素(r = 0.18),但无法进行小位置转移(r = 0.79)是一个显著的风险因素。去除糖尿病变量(最高得分为 14 分)后,EFGU 量表评分≥6 分的患者中有 97.1%发生了 PU/I。可靠性的 Cronbach alpha 系数为 0.81,该量表的敏感度为 0.97,特异性为 0.83,阳性预测值为 0.69,阴性预测值为 0.99。ICC 系数为 0.99。

结论

EFGU 量表的有效性和可靠性似乎表明其对研究中涉及的 ICU 患者发生 PU/I 具有较高的预测价值。需要进行多中心研究,纳入更多 ICU 患者样本,以验证研究结果。

相似文献

1
Assessing the Validity and Reliability of a New Pressure Ulcer Risk Assessment Scale for Patients in Intensive Care Units.评估一种新的 ICU 患者压疮风险评估量表的效度和信度。
Wound Manag Prev. 2020 Feb;66(2):24-33. doi: 10.25270/wmp.2020.2.2433.
2
Predictive validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the risk assessment pressure sore scale in intensive care patients: results of a prospective study.土耳其语版重症监护患者压疮风险评估量表的预测效度和信度:一项前瞻性研究的结果
Ostomy Wound Manage. 2015 Apr;61(4):58-62.
3
Sacral Skin Temperature and Pressure Ulcer Development: A Descriptive Study.骶部皮肤温度与压疮形成:一项描述性研究。
Wound Manag Prev. 2019 Aug;65(8):30-37.
4
Risk assessment study of the pressure ulcers in intensive care unit patients.重症监护病房患者压疮的风险评估研究
Eur J Intern Med. 2009 Jul;20(4):394-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2008.11.001. Epub 2008 Dec 6.
5
Pressure ulcer risk assessment in critical care: interrater reliability and validity studies of the Braden and Waterlow scales and subjective ratings in two intensive care units.重症监护压力性溃疡风险评估:Braden 和 Waterlow 量表及两个重症监护病房主观评估的评分者间信度和效度研究。
Int J Nurs Stud. 2010 Jun;47(6):671-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.11.005. Epub 2009 Dec 8.
6
The Challenge of Predicting Pressure Ulcers in Critically Ill Patients. A Multicenter Cohort Study.预测危重症患者压疮的挑战。一项多中心队列研究。
Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2016 Oct;13(10):1775-1783. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201603-154OC.
7
Pressure ulcers in ICU patients: Incidence and clinical and epidemiological features: A multicenter study in southern Brazil.重症监护病房患者的压疮:发病率及临床和流行病学特征:巴西南部的一项多中心研究
Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2017 Oct;42:55-61. doi: 10.1016/j.iccn.2017.03.009. Epub 2017 Apr 20.
8
Predictive validity and reliability of the Braden scale for risk assessment of pressure ulcers in an intensive care unit.重症监护病房中用于压疮风险评估的Braden量表的预测效度和信度
Med Intensiva (Engl Ed). 2018 Mar;42(2):82-91. doi: 10.1016/j.medin.2016.12.014. Epub 2017 Feb 16.
9
Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) to Predict Pressure Ulcer Risk in Intensive Care Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study.序贯器官衰竭评估(SOFA)用于预测重症监护患者的压疮风险:一项回顾性队列研究。
Ostomy Wound Manage. 2018 Oct;64(10):32-38.
10
Predictive Validity of the Braden Scale for Pressure Ulcer Risk in Critical Care: A Meta-Analysis.《Braden 量表对重症监护压疮风险预测的有效性:一项荟萃分析》。
Nurs Crit Care. 2020 May;25(3):165-170. doi: 10.1111/nicc.12500. Epub 2020 Jan 27.

引用本文的文献

1
Factors Influencing Pressure Injury Development and Survival Duration in Adults Admitted to the ICU: A Retrospective Cohort Study Following the STROBE Guidelines.影响入住重症监护病房的成人压力性损伤发生及生存时间的因素:一项遵循STROBE指南的回顾性队列研究
Healthcare (Basel). 2025 Jun 12;13(12):1411. doi: 10.3390/healthcare13121411.
2
Evaluation of the clinical effectiveness of bundled care interventions on pressure ulcer incidence in neurosurgical patients.综合护理干预对神经外科患者压疮发生率的临床效果评估。
Front Public Health. 2025 Jun 10;13:1576633. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1576633. eCollection 2025.
3
The efficacy of continuing nursing interventions on intraoperative pressure ulcer-related complications in breast cancer patients: systematic review and meta-analysis.
持续护理干预对乳腺癌患者术中压疮相关并发症的疗效:系统评价与Meta分析。
Gland Surg. 2022 Jun;11(6):1078-1085. doi: 10.21037/gs-22-258.