• 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

重新评估妇产科病房的 Morse 跌倒量表并确定最佳截断分数以增强风险评估:回顾性调查。

Re-evaluating the Morse Fall Scale in obstetrics and gynecology wards and determining optimal cut-off scores for enhanced risk assessment: A retrospective survey.

机构信息

Nursing Department, Huzhou Maternity & Child Health Care Hospital, Huzhou, China.

School of Medicine, Huzhou Teachers College, Huzhou, China.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2024 Sep 5;19(9):e0305735. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0305735. eCollection 2024.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0305735
PMID:39236031
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11376562/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to examine the validity of the MFS by analyzing the electronic medical records on fall risk in obstetrics and gynecology wards and determine the optimal cut-off score of the Morse Fall Scale.

DESIGN

A retrospective survey.

METHODS

The research was conducted in an Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital and a general hospital. The sample included 136 fall inpatients and 120 no-fall inpatients recruited from January 1st, 2020, to July 10th, 2022. The Morse Fall Scale was analyzed using the gold standard of patients who fell while hospitalized, assessing the area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and Kappa.

RESULTS

At cut-off scores of 40, 45,50, and 55, the area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic curve was 0.772, 0.761, 0.749, and 0.763, respectively. The Youden index was 0.543, 0.521, 0.498, and 0.525, while Kappa values were 0.540, 0.518, 0.490, and 0.515. Sensitivity was 0.735, 0.713, 0.640, and 0.625; specificity was 0.808, 0.808, 0.858, and 0.900. The positive predictive values were 0.813, 0.808, 0.837, and 0.876, and the negative predictive values were 0.729, 0.713, 0.678, and 0.679. Accuracy were 0.770, 0.758, 0.742, and 0.754.

CONCLUSIONS

The Morse Fall Scale demonstrates good predictive performance for assessing fall risk in gynecology and obstetrics wards. The optimal cut-off score is 40.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在通过分析妇产科病房的电子病历中的跌倒风险,检验 MFS 的有效性,并确定 Morse 跌倒量表的最佳截断值。

设计

回顾性调查。

方法

该研究在一家妇产科医院和一家综合医院进行。样本包括 2020 年 1 月 1 日至 2022 年 7 月 10 日期间招募的 136 例住院跌倒患者和 120 例非跌倒患者。使用住院期间跌倒的患者作为金标准对 Morse 跌倒量表进行分析,评估受试者工作特征曲线下面积、敏感度、特异度、准确度、阳性预测值、阴性预测值和 Kappa。

结果

在截断值为 40、45、50 和 55 时,受试者工作特征曲线下面积分别为 0.772、0.761、0.749 和 0.763。Youden 指数分别为 0.543、0.521、0.498 和 0.525,Kappa 值分别为 0.540、0.518、0.490 和 0.515。敏感度分别为 0.735、0.713、0.640 和 0.625;特异度分别为 0.808、0.808、0.858 和 0.900。阳性预测值分别为 0.813、0.808、0.837 和 0.876,阴性预测值分别为 0.729、0.713、0.678 和 0.679。准确度分别为 0.770、0.758、0.742 和 0.754。

结论

Morse 跌倒量表在评估妇产科病房跌倒风险方面具有良好的预测性能。最佳截断值为 40。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8857/11376562/42203ff1f5f9/pone.0305735.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8857/11376562/42203ff1f5f9/pone.0305735.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8857/11376562/42203ff1f5f9/pone.0305735.g001.jpg

相似文献

1
Re-evaluating the Morse Fall Scale in obstetrics and gynecology wards and determining optimal cut-off scores for enhanced risk assessment: A retrospective survey.重新评估妇产科病房的 Morse 跌倒量表并确定最佳截断分数以增强风险评估:回顾性调查。
PLoS One. 2024 Sep 5;19(9):e0305735. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0305735. eCollection 2024.
2
Validity of the Morse Fall Scale implemented in an electronic medical record system.电子病历系统中实施的莫尔斯跌倒评估量表的有效性。
J Clin Nurs. 2014 Sep;23(17-18):2434-40. doi: 10.1111/jocn.12359. Epub 2013 Sep 21.
3
Evaluation of falls by inpatients in an acute care hospital in Korea using the Morse Fall Scale.使用莫尔斯跌倒量表对韩国一家急症医院住院患者的跌倒情况进行评估。
Int J Nurs Pract. 2014 Oct;20(5):510-7. doi: 10.1111/ijn.12192. Epub 2013 Sep 30.
4
Evaluation of an inpatient fall risk screening tool to identify the most critical fall risk factors in inpatients.评估一种住院患者跌倒风险筛查工具,以识别住院患者中最关键的跌倒风险因素。
J Clin Nurs. 2017 Mar;26(5-6):698-706. doi: 10.1111/jocn.13510. Epub 2016 Dec 2.
5
Feasibility and predictive performance of the Hendrich Fall Risk Model II in a rehabilitation department: a prospective study.亨德里奇跌倒风险模型II在康复科的可行性及预测性能:一项前瞻性研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 Jan 11;18(1):18. doi: 10.1186/s12913-017-2815-x.
6
Evaluation of the "medication fall risk score".“药物跌倒风险评分”的评估
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2017 Jan 1;74(1):e32-e39. doi: 10.2146/ajhp150745. Epub 2016 Dec 22.
7
Comparison of the predictive validity of three fall risk assessment tools and analysis of fall-risk factors at a tertiary teaching hospital.三种跌倒风险评估工具的预测效度比较及某三级教学医院跌倒风险因素分析。
J Clin Nurs. 2020 Sep;29(17-18):3482-3493. doi: 10.1111/jocn.15387. Epub 2020 Jul 13.
8
Evaluation of the Morse Fall Scale: applicability in Chinese hospital populations.莫尔斯跌倒风险评估量表的评估:在中国医院人群中的适用性
Int J Nurs Stud. 2007 May;44(4):556-65. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2005.12.003. Epub 2006 Feb 7.
9
Comparison of three fall risk assessment tools in older hospitalized patients in Turkey: analysis of sensitivity and specificity.比较三种跌倒风险评估工具在土耳其老年住院患者中的应用:敏感性和特异性分析。
Aging Clin Exp Res. 2023 May;35(5):1033-1041. doi: 10.1007/s40520-023-02369-z. Epub 2023 Mar 1.
10
The predictive validity of a modified Japanese Nursing Association fall risk assessment tool: A retrospective cohort study.改良版日本护理协会跌倒风险评估工具的预测效度:一项回顾性队列研究。
Int J Nurs Stud. 2015 Sep;52(9):1484-94. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2015.05.009. Epub 2015 Jun 17.

本文引用的文献

1
Emergency nursing nurse sensitive indicators: An integrative review.急诊护理护士敏感指标:一项综合综述。
Int Emerg Nurs. 2023 Jan;66:101234. doi: 10.1016/j.ienj.2022.101234. Epub 2022 Dec 15.
2
Validity of the Morse Fall Scale and the Johns Hopkins Fall Risk Assessment Tool for fall risk assessment in an acute care setting.Morse 跌倒量表和 Johns Hopkins 跌倒风险评估工具在急性护理环境中评估跌倒风险的有效性。
J Clin Nurs. 2022 Dec;31(23-24):3584-3594. doi: 10.1111/jocn.16185. Epub 2021 Dec 28.
3
Persistent polypharmacy and fall injury risk: the Health, Aging and Body Composition Study.
持续用药和跌倒受伤风险:健康、老龄化和身体成分研究。
BMC Geriatr. 2021 Dec 15;21(1):710. doi: 10.1186/s12877-021-02695-9.
4
Older adults' perceptions of their fall risk in the hospital: An integrative review.老年人对其在医院中跌倒风险的认知:综合评价。
J Clin Nurs. 2022 Sep;31(17-18):2418-2436. doi: 10.1111/jocn.16125. Epub 2021 Nov 16.
5
Cost-effectiveness of Morse Fall Scale assessment in fall prevention care in hospitalized patients.Morse 跌倒评估量表在住院患者跌倒预防护理中的成本效益分析。
Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2021 May 28;46(5):529-535. doi: 10.11817/j.issn.1672-7347.2021.200332.
6
Fall predictors beyond fall risk assessment tool items for acute hospitalized older adults: a matched case-control study.急性住院老年人跌倒风险评估工具项目之外的跌倒预测因素:一项配对病例对照研究。
Sci Rep. 2021 Jan 15;11(1):1503. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-81034-9.
7
Evaluation of a Patient-Centered Fall-Prevention Tool Kit to Reduce Falls and Injuries: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.以患者为中心的防跌倒工具包降低跌倒和伤害的评估:一项非随机对照试验。
JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Nov 2;3(11):e2025889. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.25889.
8
Development and validation of the fall risk perception questionnaire for patients in acute care hospitals.开发和验证急性护理医院患者跌倒风险感知问卷。
J Clin Nurs. 2021 Feb;30(3-4):406-414. doi: 10.1111/jocn.15550. Epub 2020 Nov 19.
9
Inpatient fall prevention from the patient's perspective: A qualitative study.从患者角度看住院患者跌倒预防:一项定性研究。
Appl Nurs Res. 2018 Oct;43:114-119. doi: 10.1016/j.apnr.2018.08.001. Epub 2018 Aug 7.
10
Hospital Elder Life Program: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Effectiveness.医院老年人生活计划:有效性的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2018 Oct;26(10):1015-1033. doi: 10.1016/j.jagp.2018.06.007. Epub 2018 Jun 26.