Waterlow压疮评估量表在脊柱俯卧位手术中的应用

目的：分析Waterlow 压疮危险因素评估表在脊柱外科俯卧位手术患者压疮预防中的应用效果，探讨术中预防压疮的护理干预措施。方法针对术前采用Waterlow 压疮危险因素评估表评分大于20分以上的手术患者，手术开始前及时采取有效护理干预措施，加强手术体位与局部受压部位皮肤的管理。结果预防和减少了脊柱外科俯卧位手术患者急性压疮的发生。结论掌握Waterlow压疮评估量表的评估方法，做好体位护理，可以提高护理质量和患者满意度，降低压疮的发生率。     

压疮危险因素评估表的应用与管理

压疮危险因素评估表是用来预测、筛选压疮高危人群的一种工具[1].而诺顿评分是目前评估压疮发生因素最为普遍的工具之一,同时,在瑞士、荷兰、香港等国家和地区,诺顿评分法也是有效和可靠的压疮危险评估方法[2].但因诺顿评分法所含内容较少,评估不够全面,2007年1-11月在诺顿评分法的基础上,结合患者营养、体温、皮肤状态及使用镇静剂等因素进行修改设计了压疮危险因素评估表,并应用于临床,有效降低了压疮的发生率,现报道如下.     

Waterlow评估表及分级护理在预防泌尿外科肿瘤患者压疮中的应用效果

目的探讨应用Waterlow危险因素评估表及分级护理在预防泌尿外科肿瘤患者压疮中的效果。方法以2005年1月至2007年12月入院的285例肿瘤患者为对照组,以2008年1月至2010年1月人院250例患者为观察组,对照组根据传统临床经验进行护理,观察组用Waterlow危险因素评估表,根据危险评分进行分级护理,比较两组预防压疮的效果。结果观察组压疮发生率为0．8％（2／250）,对照组为9．1％（26／285）,两组压疮发生率差异有统计学意义（P〈0．01）。结论Waterlow危险因素评估表及分级护理能有效预防泌尿外科肿瘤患者压疮发生率,特别是在手术、危重、肿瘤患者中使用,可提高临床护理质量。     

两种压疮危险评估表预测效果的比较研究

[目的]测量并比较Waterlow压疮危险评估表和Braden修订版压疮危险评估表的预测效果。[方法]分别用两种评估表对332例病人进行评分，分析不同临界值时敏感性、特异性、阳性预测价值、阴性预测价值。[结果]Braden修订版压疮危险评估表以19分为临界值、Waterlow压疮危险评估表以15分为临界值时敏感性、特异性、阳性预测价值、阴性预测价值等指标间能达到较好的平衡，且Braden修订版压疮危险评估表各指标均大于Waterlow压疮危险评估表；Braden修订版压疮危险评估表的ROC曲线下面积略高于waterlow压疮危险评估表。[结论]Braden修订版压疮危险评估表和Waterlow压疮危险评估表都有较好的预测效果，尤其以Braden修订版效果更优。     

改良压疮危险因素评估表在De Bakey Ⅰ型主动脉夹层手术的预防作用

目的 分析改良压疮危险因素评估表在De Bakey Ⅰ型主动脉夹层动脉瘤手术中的压疮预防作用.方法 选取本院收治的Ⅰ型主动脉夹层患者78例,随机分为对照组、观察组各39例.分别于术前2h、术中进行压疮评估;对照组采用Waterlow评估表,观察组采用改良危险因素评估表,达到预警值则针对性采取预防措施.比较2组患者术后当天、1d、3d的骶尾部皮肤发生压疮情况.结果 对照组达到压疮预警值的例数明显少于观察组,而压疮发生率明显高于观察组(P＜0.05).结论 改良压疮危险因素评估表对De Bakey Ⅰ型主动脉夹层手术中的压疮预防具有积极意义.     

三种评估表对骶骨肿瘤术后患者压疮预测效果的研究

目的比较Braden评估表、Waterlow评估表、医院自制压疮评估表对骶骨肿瘤术后患者压疮预测的应用效果。方法将符合纳入标准的248例患者运用3种量表对每例患者进行压疮危险因素连续评估,计算各评估量表首、末次灵敏性、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值与评价量表间的一致性。结果248例中,压疮发生率为8.75%;Braden评估表、Waterlow压疮危险评估表、医院自制压疮评估表3种评估表最佳临界值:首次评估临界值依次为18、16和21分,末次评估为17、19和24分。Pearson相关性分析显示3种压疮危险评估表的首末次评分具有显著相关(P0.01)。首次及末次评分的总体一致性差异有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论 Braden评估表对骶骨肿瘤术后患者压疮危险因素的预测能力较好,是临床较好的选择。     

两种压疮危险评估表预测效果的比较研究

[目的]测量并比较Waterlow压疮危险评估表和Braden修订版压疮危险评估表的预测效果。[方法]分别用两种评估表对332例病人进行评分,分析不同临界值时敏感性、特异性、阳性预测价值、阴性预测价值。[结果]Braden修订版压疮危险评估表以19分为临界值、Waterlow压疮危险评估表以15分为临界值时敏感性、特异性、阳性预测价值、阴性预测价值等指标间能达到较好的平衡,且Braden修订版压疮危险评估表各指标均大于Waterlow压疮危险评估表;Braden修订版压疮危险评估表的ROC曲线下面积略高于Waterlow压疮危险评估表。[结论]Braden修订版压疮危险评估表和Waterlow压疮危险评估表都有较好的预测效果,尤其以Braden修订版效果更优。     

Waterlow量表在俯卧位及外科颅脑手术病人压疮预防中的应用

[目的]分析俯卧位及颅脑手术病人围术期发生急性压疮的危险因素,探讨Waterlow量表在术中预防压疮的效果。[方法]采用Waterlow压疮危险因素评估表,对211例俯卧位及颅脑手术病人进行压疮危险因素评分和相关因素分析,并实施护理干预。[结果]211例俯卧位颅脑手术病人术前压疮评分10分~15分78例,15分~20分97例,20分以上36例,发生手术急性压疮3例,均发生在评分20分以上的手术病人中,术中急性压疮的发生率为1.4%。[结论]对俯卧位及颅脑手术病人术前应用Waterlow量表进行压疮危险因素评估,并实施分级护理干预,可有效地降低俯卧位及颅脑手术压疮的发生率。     

改良压疮危险因素评估表在脑外科患者中的应用

目的探讨改良压疮危险因素评估表在颅脑外科中的应用效果。方法采用改良压疮危险因素评估表对56例新入院、手术后危重患者进行压疮危险因素评估。结果根据评分结果实施有针对性的护理干预措施,56例患者除2例特重型颅脑损伤者发生压疮,其余均未发生压疮。结论改良压疮危险因素评估表评估结果,可作为对患者进行压疮预防措施的循证证据,对有压疮危险因素的患者提供个体化护理,以降低压疮的发生率。     

Waterlow压疮危险评估表在神经外科ICU的应用

目的评价Waterlow压疮危险评估表在神经外科ICU的作用,探讨一种有效而准确的评估工具。方法运用Waterlow评估表对神经外科ICU841例病人进行压疮评估。结果观察组压疮发生率4.85%,对照组的发生率15.20%,2组比较差异有显著性意义(P<0.01)。结论Waterlow评估表是一种科学准确地筛选皮肤危险人群的评测工具,能有效控制压疮发生率。     

Comparing Norton, Braden and Waterlow risk assessment scales for pressure ulcers in spinal cord injuries

When pressure ulcers occur health care services are faced with considerable challenges and costs. Additionally these ulcers cause significant physical and psycho-social impairment for patients and their families. The complexity of pressure ulcer management is widely acknowledged in the literature. However, the applicability of the major risk assessment scales in the context of spinal cord injury has not been explored. Retrospective case history audit of individuals with pressure ulcers provided data to compare the three commonly used Norton, Braden and Waterlow scales. Waterlow's scale was the most sensitive of the three scales compared.     

老年患者压疮的防治

目的探讨有效的防治压疮方法。方法应用我院根据Norton危险因素评分法和Anderson危险指标评分法改良的压疮预防监控表,进行全身皮肤的评估,对评分≥15分的132例老年患者随机分为二组:一组进行常规的压疮防治方法进行护理64例,另一组在压疮好发部位敷贴3M透明薄膜进行护理68例。结果使用3M透明敷贴的老年患者较使用常规措施的老年患者在预防压疮方面有显著的效果。结论在临床上护理人员对容易发生压疮的高危患者采取积极有效的预防措施,能降低压疮的发生率。     

A clinical trial of the Braden Scale for Predicting Pressure Sore Risk

The purpose of this article was to describe the protocol by which predictive instruments can be tested for validity and to evaluate the usefulness of an instrument for predicting pressure sore risk in an AICU. The Braden Scale for Predicting Pressure Sore Risk was described. Methods for measuring predictive validity and for calculating sensitivity, specificity, and per cent predictive value of positive and negative tests were discussed. Sixty consecutively admitted AICU patients who were pressure sore free were rated for pressure sore risk within 24 to 72 hours after admission. The skin condition of each patient was systematically assessed every 2 days. Twenty-four subjects developed pressure sores during the study period. The critical cut-off point at which the patient could be judged to be at risk for pressure sore formation was a Braden Scale score equal to or less than 16. The sensitivity and specificity of the scale at this score were 83 to 64 per cent, respectively. The per cent predictive value of a positive and negative test were 61 and 85 per cent, respectively. The Braden Scale compared favorably with the Norton Scale in respect to sensitivity. The specificity, or the tendency of a scale to overpredict, was greater for the Norton than for the Braden Scale. The Norton Scale overpredicted by 64 per cent, whereas the Braden Scale overpredicted by 36 per cent. This difference may be important clinically if all patients who were judged to be at risk received additional nursing care or protective devices. A greater number of patients may receive unnecessary and expensive treatments using the Norton Scale.     

La escala APACHE III: un factor pronóstico en la aparición de úlceras por presión en una Unidad de Cuidados Intensivos

ObjectiveTo analyze total APACHE III score association to pressure ulcers development in patients hospitalized in an intensive care unit (ICU).Material and methodsProspective cohort study conducted in an intensive care unit of the Hospital General de VIC. All the patients hospitalized between January 2001 to December 2001 were enrolled. Age, gender, length of stay, total Norton and APACHE III score and pressure sore development were collected.ResultsPressure sore incidence was 12.5% of the patients. The factors were significantly associated with the appearance of pressure sores in those patients with a length of stay in the intensive care unit, total Norton and severity of the disease measured by the APACHE III score. Patients having the greatest risk of pressure ulcers development were those whose Norton score was less than or equal to 14, and an APACHE III score higher than or equal to 50 (Odds Ratio: 37.9, 95% CI 11.16-128.47)ConclusionThe severity of the diseases measured with the APACHE III scale showed a relationship with the appearance of in-hospital pressure ulcers.The joint use of the APACHE III and Norton scale could be a good strategy to detect patients with very high risk of suffering pressure sores.     

Pressure ulcers: validation of two risk assessment scales

Aims and objectives. To compare the predictive value of two pressure ulcer risk assessment scales (Braden and Norton) and of clinical judgement. To evaluate the impact of effective preventive measures on the predictive validity of the two risk assessment scales. Methods. Of the 1772 participating older patients, 314 were randomly selected and assigned to the ‘turning’ group; 1458 patients were assigned to the ‘non‐turning’ group. Using the Braden and the Norton scale the pressure ulcer risk was scored twice weekly during a four‐week period. Clinical assessment was monitored daily. The patients at risk in the ‘turning’ group (Braden score <17 or Norton score <12) were randomly assigned to a two‐hour turning schedule or to a four‐hour turning schedule in combination with a pressure‐reducing mattress. The ‘non‐turning’ group received preventive care based on the clinical judgement of the nurses. Results. The diagnostic accuracy was similar for both scales. If nurses act according to risk assessment scales, 80% of the patients would unnecessarily receive preventive measures. The use of effective preventive measures decreased the predictive value of the risk assessment scales. Nurses predicted pressure ulcer development less well than the Braden and the Norton scale. Only activity, sensory perception, skin condition and existence of old pressure ulcers were significant predictors of pressure ulcer lesions. Relevance to clinical practice. The effectiveness of the Norton and Braden scales is very low. Much needless work is done and expensive material is wrongly allocated. The use of effective preventive measures decreases the predictive value of the risk assessment scales. Although the performance of the risk assessment scales is poor, using a risk assessment tool seems to be a better alternative than relying on the clinical judgement of the nurses.     

Interrater reliability using Modified Norton Scale, Pressure Ulcer Card, Short Form-Mini Nutritional Assessment by registered and enrolled nurses in clinical practice

Aim. Examine the interrater reliability between and among registered and enrolled nurses using Modified Norton Scale, Pressure Ulcer Card and Short Form‐Mini Nutritional Assessment. Background. In Sweden, registered nurses and enrolled nurses usually co‐operate in patient care. National guidelines emphasize that reliable and valid assessment tools should be used. Interrater reliability for regular use of assessment tools is seldom studied. Design cross‐sectional. Registered nurses and enrolled nurses made 228 assessments of patients’ skin, risk for pressure ulcer and malnutrition, in patients with hip fracture and patients who had suffered a stroke. Results. The interrater reliability of the Modified Norton Score total score was very good among registered nurses, good among enrolled nurses and between both groups. There was good, moderate and fair agreement on the subscales. Interrater reliability of Short Form Mini‐Nutritional Assesment screening score was very good between both groups, good among registered nurses and moderate among enrolled nurses. There was good and moderate agreement on the items. There was good, moderate and fair agreement between and among registered nurses and enrolled nurses when using the Pressure Ulcer Card. Conclusion. The Modified Norton Scale and Short Form Mini‐Nutritional Assessment were reasonably understandable and easy to utilize in clinical care. Therefore, it seems possible for nurses to accomplish assessment using these tools. The agreement level was low for most skin sites except sacrum when nurses assessed patients’ skin with the Pressure Ulcer Card. Relevance to clinical practice. The utilize of reliable and valid assessment tools is important in clinical practice. The tools could be used as an aid to the clinical judgement and therefore identify patients at risk for pressure ulcers and malnutrition. Pressure ulcer grading is a difficult skill that requires training and time to develop.     

Pressure ulcers in palliative care: development of a hospice pressure ulcer risk assessment scale

The aim of this study was to construct a pressure ulcer risk assessment scale appropriate for palliative care patients. Risk assessments were performed using the modified Norton scale and nine newly constructed scales, consisting of the modified Norton scale with various changes. Data were collected from 98 patients in a Swedish hospice between April 1999 and September 2000. Pressure ulcer occurrence was registered weekly in the patient record. Increasing age, male gender, physical inactivity, immobility, decreasing food and fluid intake, incontinence, poor general physical condition and lean body constitution were shown to be significant risk factors for development of pressure ulcers in terminally ill cancer patients. After further testing of the data, one scale was found to be superior in identifying patients at risk, with higher validity than the modified Norton scale. The assessment items in this new scale, The Hospice Pressure Ulcer Risk Assessment Scale (in Swedish: Hospice Riskbed?ming Trycks?r, (HoRT)), are physical activity, mobility and age.     

The Use of the Modified Norton Scale in Nursing-Home Patients

Patients in three nursing-home wards in Sweden were in 1991 assessed by the Modified Norton Scale (MNS). Of the 71 patients, 38 (49%) were considered to be at risk of developing pressure sores. Six of the patients had a total of eight pressure sores. Five sores were assessed as stage II, two sores as stage III and one sore as stage IV. Only two of the six patients with pressure sores had any preventive equipment in their beds. The nursing and medical documentation of the existing pressure sores was not satisfactory. Individual programs for skin care and routine assessment with a pressure sore prediction instrument, such as the MNS, would serve the dual purpose of directing the relevant measures to the patient groups at the greatest risk and would aid in assessing the efficacy of pressure sore treatment strategies.     

Pressure ulcer risk assessment immediately after cardiac surgery – does it make a difference? A comparison of three pressure ulcer risk assessment instruments within a cardiac surgery population

The intensive care unit (ICU) population has a high risk of developing pressure ulcers. According to several national expert guidelines for pressure ulcer prevention, a risk assessment for every situation in which the patient's condition is changing should be performed using a standardized risk assessment instrument. The aims of this study were to (a) assess the number of patients who are 'at risk' for the development of pressure ulcer according to three commonly used risk assessment instruments in the intermediate period after cardiac surgery procedures, (b) assess which instrument best fits the situation of the ICU patients and c) decide if 'static' risk assessment with an instrument should be recommended. The modified Norton scale, the Braden scale and the 4-factor model were used in a convenience sample of 53 patients to assess the risk for development of pressure ulcer in the first 5 days (in ICU) after cardiac surgery procedures. The number of patients at risk were >60% by the 4-factor model, >70% by the modified Norton scale and >80% by the Braden scale. Sensitivity and specificity in all scales were not satisfactory. Forty-nine per cent (n= 26) of the patients developed a pressure ulcer in the operating room, 13% (n= 7) up to day 5 in the cardiac surgery ICU. Only 1.9% (n= 1) of the pressure ulcers were stage 2. The study concluded that the patients in the cardiac surgery ICU can be identified as at risk during the first 5 days after surgical procedure without continuously using a standardized risk assessment instrument in every changing condition. Individual risk assessment by a standardized risk assessment instrument is only recommended to enable initiation of preventive measures based on patient-specific risk factors.     

压疮危险因素评估表预测不同患者群体压疮发生的研究

目的比较压疮危险因素评估表（Norton ulcer risk assessment scale,以下简称Norton量表）对不同年龄组及不同病区患者压疮的预测效果。方法运用Norton量表对内外科住院患者进行连续评估,计算量表对不同患者群体预测的灵敏度、特异性、预测值。结果 Norton量表对老年患者灵敏度96.96%、特异性87.68%、阳性预测值22.96%,阴性预测值99.87%;对中青年患者灵敏度97.37%、特异性96.73%、阳性预测值12.05%、阴性预测值99.98%,Norton量表对老年患者及中青年患者压疮预测均具有较高的灵敏度和特异性。Norton量表对内科、外科及不同病区患者均具有较高的预测灵敏度;对神经外科、ICU患者预测特异性较低。结论 Norton量表对不同年龄组和不同病区患者皆具有较好的预测效果,内外科各病区可以统一使用Norton量表对患者进行压疮高危筛查和评估。