Pang S M, Wong T K
Department of Nursing and Health Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Kowloon.
Nurs Res. 1998 May-Jun;47(3):147-53. doi: 10.1097/00006199-199805000-00005.
Numerous pressure sore risk calculators have been developed since the 1960s. Each scale is claimed to have predictive value and applicability in various clinical settings, but it has not been determined which one is more relevant for adoption in a rehabilitation setting.
To compare the predictive power of the three most commonly adopted pressure sore risk calculators: Norton, Braden, and Waterlow scales.
One hundred six patients, free of pressure sores at admission, were assessed using the three scales by independent assessors within 48 hours of admission, followed by a daily monitoring of skin condition for at least 14 days to detect any sore that developed.
Both the Norton and Waterlow scales had relatively high sensitivity (81% and 95%, respectively), whereas the Braden Scale had both high sensitivity (91%) and specificity (62%). All three scales had relatively high negative predictive values (>90%), but the Braden Scale had better positive predictive value.
The Braden Scale is more suitable for use in a rehabilitation hospital.
自20世纪60年代以来，已开发出众多压疮风险评估工具。每种评估量表都声称在各种临床环境中具有预测价值和适用性，但尚未确定哪种量表更适合在康复环境中采用。
比较三种最常用的压疮风险评估工具：诺顿量表、布拉德恩量表和沃特洛量表的预测能力。
106例入院时无压疮的患者在入院48小时内由独立评估人员使用这三种量表进行评估，随后每天监测皮肤状况至少14天，以检测出现的任何压疮。
诺顿量表和沃特洛量表均具有相对较高的敏感性（分别为81%和95%），而布拉德恩量表具有较高的敏感性（91%）和特异性（62%）。所有三种量表均具有相对较高的阴性预测值（>90%），但布拉德恩量表具有更好的阳性预测值。
布拉德恩量表更适合在康复医院使用。
