Shi Zeyao, Li Xiaowen
Department of Neonatology Nursing, West China Second University Hospital, Sichuan University/West China School of Nursing, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children (Sichuan University), Ministry of Education, Chengdu, China.
Int Wound J. 2023 Oct 5;21(2). doi: 10.1111/iwj.14430.
To compare the predictive ability and reliability of two pressure injury (PI) assessment tools, the Neonatal/Infant(N/I) Braden Q and Braden QD scale, in neonates. A prospective and cross-sectional study. This study was conducted in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) of a tertiary-level university hospital in China between April and June 2023. A total of 410 patients were included in this study. Risk assessment was performed with the N/I Braden Q scale, followed immediately with the Braden QD scale once daily. Risk assessment was terminated when the PI developed or the patient was discharged from the NICU or died. Each patient's final risk assessment was considered in the data analysis. The area under the curve (AUC) of the two scales was 0.879 and 0.857, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and Cronbach's α coefficient of the N/I Braden Q Scale scores were 0.844, 0.833, 0.30, 0.984 and 0.806, respectively. The Braden QD scale scores were 0.938, 0.733, 0.229, 0.993 and 0.727, respectively. Both scales are valid and reliable in predicting the risk of PI in the NICU. The N/I Braden Q Scale was better to distinguish patients at PI risk and not at PI risk than the Braden QD scale. The literature is limited on this topic. This study provides insight into the comparison of different pressure injury risk assessment scales. The findings of this study may guide nurses to choose a suitable tool to assess the risk of pressure injury in neonates.
为比较两种压力性损伤(PI)评估工具——新生儿/婴儿(N/I)Braden Q量表和Braden QD量表在新生儿中的预测能力和可靠性。一项前瞻性横断面研究。本研究于2023年4月至6月在中国一所三级大学医院的新生儿重症监护病房(NICU)进行。本研究共纳入410例患者。使用N/I Braden Q量表进行风险评估,随后每天立即使用Braden QD量表进行一次评估。当发生PI、患者从NICU出院或死亡时,风险评估终止。数据分析时考虑每位患者的最终风险评估结果。两种量表的曲线下面积(AUC)分别为0.879和0.857。N/I Braden Q量表评分的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值和Cronbach's α系数分别为0.844、0.833、0.30、0.984和0.806。Braden QD量表评分分别为0.938、0.733、0.229、0.993和0.727。两种量表在预测NICU中PI风险方面均有效且可靠。N/I Braden Q量表在区分有PI风险和无PI风险的患者方面比Braden QD量表更好。关于这一主题的文献有限。本研究为不同压力性损伤风险评估量表的比较提供了见解。本研究结果可能指导护士选择合适的工具来评估新生儿压力性损伤的风险。