Muller M T, Verfaille R, Ribbe M W
Vrije Universiteit, vakgroep Huisarts- en Verpleeghuisgeneeskunde, Amsterdam.
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 1993 May 29;137(22):1099-102.
To assess the diagnostic value of the opinion of the nursing staff and the patients themselves about hearing impairment of somatic nursing home patients.
Descriptive.
Nursing Home and Rehabilitation Centre Amstelhof in Amsterdam.
All newly admitted patients in the period October 1989 to mid-May 1990 were asked to give an opinion about their hearing; the nursing staff were asked for an opinion as well. The results of these two measurements were compared with the results of the screening audiogram, used as the gold standard. For both the nursing staff opinion and the patients' opinion sensitivity, specificity and predictive values were calculated.
79 patients were included in this study. The sensitivity of the opinion of the nursing staff was 54%, the specificity 80%. The predictive values of the positive and negative test results were 59% and 76% respectively. The sensitivity of the patients' opinion was 68% and the specificity 80%. The predictive value of the positive test result was 65% and that of the negative test result 82%.
Neither the opinion of the nursing staff, nor the opinion of the patients were valid methods to identify hearing-impaired nursing home patients. We recommended paying more attention to tracing hearing impairment in nursing home patients: the nursing staff should be trained and a screening audiogram should be made of all patients admitted.
评估护理人员和患者本人对于躯体护理院患者听力障碍的诊断价值。
描述性研究。
阿姆斯特丹的阿姆斯泰尔霍夫护理院及康复中心。
对1989年10月至1990年5月中旬期间所有新入院患者询问其听力情况；同时也询问护理人员的看法。将这两项测量结果与作为金标准的筛查听力图结果进行比较。计算护理人员看法和患者看法的敏感度、特异度及预测值。
本研究纳入79例患者。护理人员看法的敏感度为54%，特异度为80%。阳性和阴性检测结果的预测值分别为59%和76%。患者看法的敏感度为68%，特异度为80%。阳性检测结果的预测值为65%，阴性检测结果的预测值为82%。
护理人员的看法和患者的看法均不是识别护理院听力受损患者的有效方法。我们建议更加重视护理院患者听力障碍的排查：应对护理人员进行培训，并对所有入院患者进行筛查听力图检查。
