{"title":"比较诺顿量表和布莱登量表在确定老年患者压伤风险方面的预测效力。","authors":"Ibrahim Kiyat, Ayfer Ozbas","doi":"10.1097/NUR.0000000000000815","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare the reliability and predictive validity of Norton and Braden scales in determining the risk of pressure injury in elderly patients.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This research used a comparative design. One hundred thirty elderly patients participated in the study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The daily pressure injury risk of participants was evaluated by a researcher using both the Norton and Braden scales in a consecutive manner.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean age of patients was 75.1 ± 8.5 years, and that for those without and with pressure injury development was 75.0 ± 8.3 years and 76.1 ± 9.7 years (P < .001), respectively. The reliability coefficients of the Norton and Braden scales were .82 and .89, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the Norton Scale were 100%, 40.7%, 20.2%, and 100%, and those of the Braden Scale were 100%, 32.7%, 18.3%, and 100%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The reliability of both scales for elderly patients was found to be high, and their ability to differentiate patients at risk was comparable. However, both scales had low specificity. Further research is needed to develop scales that have higher predictive validity for the elderly population, taking into account other risk factors that influence total scale scores.</p>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of the Predictive Validity of Norton and Braden Scales in Determining the Risk of Pressure Injury in Elderly Patients.\",\"authors\":\"Ibrahim Kiyat, Ayfer Ozbas\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/NUR.0000000000000815\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare the reliability and predictive validity of Norton and Braden scales in determining the risk of pressure injury in elderly patients.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>This research used a comparative design. One hundred thirty elderly patients participated in the study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The daily pressure injury risk of participants was evaluated by a researcher using both the Norton and Braden scales in a consecutive manner.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean age of patients was 75.1 ± 8.5 years, and that for those without and with pressure injury development was 75.0 ± 8.3 years and 76.1 ± 9.7 years (P < .001), respectively. The reliability coefficients of the Norton and Braden scales were .82 and .89, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the Norton Scale were 100%, 40.7%, 20.2%, and 100%, and those of the Braden Scale were 100%, 32.7%, 18.3%, and 100%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The reliability of both scales for elderly patients was found to be high, and their ability to differentiate patients at risk was comparable. However, both scales had low specificity. Further research is needed to develop scales that have higher predictive validity for the elderly population, taking into account other risk factors that influence total scale scores.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/NUR.0000000000000815\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/NUR.0000000000000815","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of the Predictive Validity of Norton and Braden Scales in Determining the Risk of Pressure Injury in Elderly Patients.
Aim: To compare the reliability and predictive validity of Norton and Braden scales in determining the risk of pressure injury in elderly patients.
Design: This research used a comparative design. One hundred thirty elderly patients participated in the study.
Methods: The daily pressure injury risk of participants was evaluated by a researcher using both the Norton and Braden scales in a consecutive manner.
Results: The mean age of patients was 75.1 ± 8.5 years, and that for those without and with pressure injury development was 75.0 ± 8.3 years and 76.1 ± 9.7 years (P < .001), respectively. The reliability coefficients of the Norton and Braden scales were .82 and .89, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the Norton Scale were 100%, 40.7%, 20.2%, and 100%, and those of the Braden Scale were 100%, 32.7%, 18.3%, and 100%, respectively.
Conclusions: The reliability of both scales for elderly patients was found to be high, and their ability to differentiate patients at risk was comparable. However, both scales had low specificity. Further research is needed to develop scales that have higher predictive validity for the elderly population, taking into account other risk factors that influence total scale scores.
期刊介绍：
Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance.
Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
