• 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

Reliability and validity of the Braden Scale in the home care setting.

作者信息

Ramundo J M

出版信息

J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 1995 May;22(3):128-34. doi: 10.1097/00152192-199505000-00010.

DOI:10.1097/00152192-199505000-00010
PMID:7599722
Abstract

The Agency for Health Care Policy and Research guidelines for prediction and prevention of pressure ulcers have encouraged the use of risk assessment tools to identify those patients most likely to acquire a pressure ulcer. The Braden Scale has been widely tested and shown to be valid for use in acute and long-term care settings. Little data exist, however, on the use of the Braden Scale in the home care setting. This study determined the sensitivity and specificity of Braden Scale scores obtained for home care patients. Pressure ulcer incidence rate was 17%. Braden Scale scores ranged from 11 to 22. At a score of 18, sensitivity of the tool was 100%; the specificity was only 34%, however, indicating that the Braden Scale has validity in identifying patients at risk but has limited predictive ability.

摘要

相似文献

1
Reliability and validity of the Braden Scale in the home care setting.
J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 1995 May;22(3):128-34. doi: 10.1097/00152192-199505000-00010.
2
An interrater reliability study of the assessment of pressure ulcer risk using the Braden scale and the classification of pressure ulcers in a home care setting.一项在家庭护理环境中使用Braden量表评估压疮风险及压疮分类的评分者间信度研究。
Int J Nurs Stud. 2009 Oct;46(10):1307-12. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.03.014. Epub 2009 Apr 29.
3
Predicting pressure ulcer risk with the modified Braden, Braden, and Norton scales in acute care hospitals in Mainland China.在中国内地的急症医院中,使用改良版Braden量表、Braden量表和Norton量表预测压疮风险。
Appl Nurs Res. 2005 May;18(2):122-8. doi: 10.1016/j.apnr.2005.01.001.
4
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.
5
Pressure ulcer prevalence and incidence and a modification of the Braden Scale for a rehabilitation unit.康复科压力性溃疡的患病率、发病率及Braden量表的修订
J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 1998 Jan;25(1):36-43. doi: 10.1016/s1071-5754(98)90011-0.
6
Subscales, subscores, or summative score: evaluating the contribution of Braden Scale items for predicting pressure ulcer risk in older adults receiving home health care.分量表、子分数或总分:评估布拉登量表项目对预测接受家庭医疗护理的老年人压疮风险的贡献。
J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2001 Nov;28(6):279-89. doi: 10.1067/mjw.2001.119012.
7
The effect of Web-based Braden Scale training on the reliability and precision of Braden Scale pressure ulcer risk assessments.基于网络的Braden量表培训对Braden量表压疮风险评估的可靠性和准确性的影响。
J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2008 Mar-Apr;35(2):199-208; discussion 209-12. doi: 10.1097/01.WON.0000313643.60117.b2.
8
Incidence of pressure ulcers in a neurologic intensive care unit.神经重症监护病房中压疮的发生率。
Crit Care Med. 2001 Feb;29(2):283-90. doi: 10.1097/00003246-200102000-00011.
9
An interrater reliability study of the Braden scale in two nursing homes.在两家养老院对Braden量表进行的评分者间信度研究。
Int J Nurs Stud. 2008 Oct;45(10):1501-11. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2008.02.007.
10
Clinical trial of the Braden Scale on an acute care medical unit.急性护理医疗单元中Braden量表的临床试验。
J ET Nurs. 1992 Sep-Oct;19(5):160-5.

引用本文的文献

1
Predictive validity of the braden scale for pressure injury risk assessment in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Braden 量表评估成人压力性损伤风险的预测效度:系统评价和荟萃分析。
Nurs Open. 2021 Sep;8(5):2194-2207. doi: 10.1002/nop2.792. Epub 2021 Feb 25.