Pressure ulcer risk assessment in critical care: Interrater reliability and validity studies of the Braden and Waterlow scales and subjective ratings in two intensive care units

被引:73
|
作者
Kottner, Jan [1 ]
Dassen, Theo [1 ]
机构
[1] Charite, Dept Nursing Sci, Ctr Humanities & Hlth Sci, D-13353 Berlin, Germany
关键词
Pressure ulcers; Risk assessment; Validity; Reliability; Reproducibility; SAMPLE-SIZE; COEFFICIENTS; PREVENTION; NORTON; KAPPA; MODEL;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.11.005
中图分类号
R47 [护理学];
学科分类号
1011 ;
摘要
Background The application of standardized pressure ulcer risk assessment scales is recommended in clinical practice Objectives The aims of this study were to compare the interrater reliabilities of the Braden and Waterlow scores and subjective pressure ulcer risk assessment and to determine the construct validity of these three assessment approaches Design Observational Settings. Two intensive care units of a large University Hospital in Germany Participants. 21 and 24 patients were assessed by 53 nurses Patients' mean age was 697 (SD 8.3) and 67.2 (SD 11 3) Methods Two interrater reliability studies were conducted Samples of patients were assessed independently by a sample of three nurses A 10-cm visual analogue scale was applied to measure subjective pressure ulcer risk rating. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and standard errors of measurement (SEM) were used to determine interrater reliability and agreement of the item and sum scores Pearson product moment correlation coefficients (r) were used to indicate the degree and dilution of the relationships between the measures Results The interrater reliability for the subjective pressure ulcer risk assessment was ICC(1,1)= 0 51 (95% Cl 0 26-0 74) and 0 71 (95% Cl 0 53-0 85) Interrater reliability of Braden scale sum scores was ICC(1,1)= 0.72(95% Cl 0 52-0 87) and 0.84(95% Cl 0 72-0 92) and for Waterlow scale sum scores ICC(1,1)= 0.36 (95% CI 0.09-0 63) and 0 51(95% Cl 0.27-0 72) The absolute degree of correlation between the measures ranged from 051 to 077 Conclusions Interrater reliability coefficients indicate a high degree of measurement error inherent in the scores Compared to subjective risk assessment and the Waterlow scale scores the Braden scale performed best. However, measurement error is too high to draw valid inferences for individuals. Less than 26-59% of variances in scores of one scale were determined by scores of another scale indicating that all three instruments only partly measured the same construct The use of the Braden-, Waterlow- and Visual Analogue scales for measuring pressure ulcer risk of intensive care unit patients is not recommended (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:671 / 677
页数:7
相关论文
共 39 条
  • [1] Pressure injury risk assessment in intensive care units: Comparison of the reliability and predictive validity of the Braden and Jackson/Cubbin scales
    Adibelli, Seyma
    Korkmaz, Fatos
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, 2019, 28 (23-24) : 4595 - 4605
  • [2] An interrater reliability study of the assessment of pressure ulcer risk using the Braden scale and the classification of pressure ulcers in a home care setting
    Kottner, Jan
    Halfens, Ruud
    Dassen, Theo
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NURSING STUDIES, 2009, 46 (10) : 1307 - 1312
  • [3] A comparison of the performance of the Braden Q and the Glamorgan paediatric pressure ulcer risk assessment scales in general and intensive care paediatric and neonatal units
    Willock, Jane
    Habiballah, Laila
    Long, Deborah
    Palmer, Kelli
    Anthony, Denis
    JOURNAL OF TISSUE VIABILITY, 2016, 25 (02) : 119 - 126
  • [4] Assessing the Validity and Reliability of a New Pressure Ulcer Risk Assessment Scale for Patients in Intensive Care Units
    Efteli, Elcin
    Gunes, Ulku
    WOUND MANAGEMENT & PREVENTION, 2020, 66 (02) : 24 - 33
  • [5] Predictive validity and reliability of the Braden scale for risk assessment of pressure ulcers in an intensive care unit
    Lima-Serrano, M.
    Gonzalez-Mendez, M. I.
    Martin-Castano, C.
    Alonso-Araujo, I.
    Lima-Rodriguez, J. S.
    MEDICINA INTENSIVA, 2018, 42 (02) : 82 - 91
  • [6] Comparison of the predictive validity of the Braden and Waterlow scales in intensive care unit patients: A multicentre study
    Tao, Hongxia
    Zhang, Hongyan
    Ma, Yuxia
    Lv, Lin
    Pei, Juhong
    Jiao, Yanxia
    Han, Lin
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, 2024, 33 (05) : 1809 - 1819
  • [7] Validity of pressure ulcer risk assessment scales; Cubbin and Jackson, Braden, and Douglas scale
    Seongsook, RNJ
    Ihnsook, RNJ
    Younghee, RNL
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF NURSING STUDIES, 2004, 41 (02) : 199 - 204
  • [8] Turkish Nurses' Opinions of the Braden and Waterlow Pressure Ulcer Risk Assessment Scales: A Descriptive Pilot Study
    Avsar, Pinar
    Karadag, Ayise
    OSTOMY WOUND MANAGEMENT, 2016, 62 (02) : 34 - 40
  • [9] Assessment of pressure injury risk in intensive care using the COMHON index: An interrater reliability study
    Uslu, Yasemin
    Fulbrook, Paul
    Eren, Esra
    Lovegrove, Josephine
    Cobos-Vargas, Angel
    Colmenero, Manuel
    INTENSIVE AND CRITICAL CARE NURSING, 2024, 83
  • [10] Interrater agreement, reliability and validity of the Glamorgan Paediatric Pressure Ulcer Risk Assessment Scale
    Kottner, Jan
    Kenzler, Martina
    Wilborn, Doris
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, 2014, 23 (7-8) : 1165 - 1169