...
首页> 外文期刊>Critical care medicine >Validity and reliability of an intuitive conscious sedation scoring tool: the nursing instrument for the communication of sedation.
【24h】

Validity and reliability of an intuitive conscious sedation scoring tool: the nursing instrument for the communication of sedation.

机译:直观的镇静评分工具的有效性和可靠性:用于镇静沟通的护理工具。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

OBJECTIVE: To develop a symmetrical 7-level scale (+3, "dangerously agitated" to -3, "deeply sedated") that is both intuitive and easy to use, the Nursing Instrument for the Communication of Sedation (NICS). DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: University medical center. PATIENTS: Mixed surgical, medical intensive care unit (ICU) population. INTERVENTIONS: Patient assessment. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Criterion, construct, face validity, and interrater reliability of NICS over time and comparison of ease of use and nursing preference between NICS and four common intensive care unit sedation scales. A total of 395 observations were performed in 104 patients (20 intubated [INT], 84 non intubated) by 59 intensive care unit providers. Criterion validity was tested comparing NICS WITH the 8-point level of arousal scale, demonstrating excellent correlation (rs = .96 overall, .95 non intubated, 0.85 intubated, all p < .001). Construct validity was confirmed by comparing NICS with the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale, demonstrating excellent correlation (rs = .98, p < .001). Face validity was determined in a blinded survey of 53 intensive care unit nurses evaluating NICS and four other sedation scales. NICS was highly rated as easy to score, intuitive, and a clinically relevant measure of sedation, and agitation and was preferred overall (74% NICS, 17% Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale, 11% Other, p < .001 NICS vs. Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale). Interrater reliability was assessed, using the five scales at three timed intervals, during which 37% of patients received sedative medication. The mean NICS score consistently correlated with each of the other scales over time with an rs of >.9. Using the intraclass correlation coefficient as a measure of Interrater reliability, NICS scored as high, or higher than Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale, Riker Sedation-Agitation Scale, Motor Activity Assessment Scale, or Ramsay over the three time periods. CONCLUSION: NICS is a valid and reliable sedation scale for use in a mixed population of intensive care unit patients. NICS ranked highest in nursing preference and ease of communication and may thus permit more effective and interactive management of sedation.
机译:目的:开发一种既直观又易于使用的对称的7级量表(+3,“危险搅动”至-3,“深度镇静”),用于镇静交流的护理仪器(NICS)。设计:前瞻性队列研究。地点:大学医学中心。患者:外科,医疗重症监护室(ICU)人群混合。干预措施:患者评估。测量和主要结果:随着时间的推移,NICS的标准,结构,面部有效性和内在可靠性,以及NICS与四种常见的重症监护室镇静等级之间的易用性和护理偏好的比较。 59家重症监护病房提供者对104例患者进行了395次观察(其中20例插管[INT],84例未插管)。通过将NICS与8点唤起量表进行比较,对标准有效性进行了测试,证明了极好的相关性(总体= 0.96,未插管为0.95,已插管为0.85,所有p <0.001)。通过将NICS与里士满躁动镇静量表进行比较,可以确认构建体的有效性,并显示出极好的相关性(rs = .98,p <.001)。通过对53位重症监护室护士进行的盲法调查确定了面部有效性,这些护士评估了NICS和其他四种镇静等级。 NICS被评为易于评分,直观且具有镇静和躁动的临床相关测量指标,并被整体推荐(74%NICS,17%Richmond镇静镇静量表,11%Other,p <.001 NICS vs. Richmond躁动镇静量表)。使用五个量表以三个时间间隔评估了评估者间的信度,在此期间37%的患者接受了镇静药物治疗。随着时间的流逝,NICS的平均得分与其他各个量表始终保持相关性,rs≥0.9。使用类内相关系数作为评定者的信度,NICS在三个时间段内的评分均高于或高于列治文躁动镇静量表,瑞克镇静激动量表,运动活动评估量表或拉姆齐。结论:NICS是一种有效且可靠的镇静量表,适用于重症监护病房患者的混合人群。 NICS在护理偏好和沟通便利性方面排名最高,因此可以使镇静措施更加有效和互动。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号