三种压疮风险评估工具预测无创正压通气患者鼻面部压疮的效果
作者: |
1陈洁雅,
1张国龙,
1宫玉翠,
1李平东,
1李佳颖,
1石海霞
1 广州医科大学附属第一医院呼吸健康研究院,广州 510120 |
通讯: |
张国龙
Email: 502091422@qq.com |
DOI: | 10.3978/j.issn.2095-6959.2021.07.029 |
摘要
目的:探讨Waterlaw量表、Braden量表、Norton量表3种压疮风险评估工具在无创正压通气患者鼻面部压疮的应用价值和预测效能。方法:选取2017年1月至2018年12月在广州医科大学附属第一医院使用无创正压通气的287例慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者,在患者实施无创正压通气前后2 h内应用Waterlaw量表、Braden量表、Norton量表进行评估,并计算3种压疮评价工具的ROC曲线下面积、预测值、临界值、敏感性和特异性。结果:本组共有56例(19.5%)患者发生鼻面部压疮;无鼻面部压疮患者在Waterlaw量表的得分明显低于鼻面部压疮患者,Braden量表、Norton量表的得分明显高于鼻面部压疮患者(P<0.001)。Waterlaw量表、Braden量表、Norton量表的ROC曲线下面积依次为0.769、0.710和0.693,差异均具有统计学意义(P<0.05),其中Waterlaw量表的曲线下面积明显高于Braden量表和Norton量表(Z=2.263和2.381,P<0.05);三者的阳性预测值和阴性预测值依次为61.191与89.082、37.166与87.091、40.893与86.886,其临界值分数依次为23、14和10分;敏感性系数和特异性系数依次为53.570和91.770、51.790和78.790、48.210和83.120。结论:Waterlaw量表、Braden量表、Norton量表均能在一定程度上预测无创正压通气患者鼻面部压疮的发生,其中Waterlaw量表的预测能力相对较高,但其敏感性相对较低。
关键词:
无创正压通气;面部压疮;Waterlaw量表;Braden量表;Norton量表;预测
Effect of three pressure ulcer risk assessment tools in predicting nasofacial pressure ulcers in patients undergoing noninvasive positive pressure ventilation
CorrespondingAuthor: ZHANG Guolong Email: 502091422@qq.com
DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2095-6959.2021.07.029
Abstract
Objective: To explore the application value and predictive efficacy of three pressure ulcer risk assessment tools: Waterlaw scale, Braden scale and Norton scale, in patients with nasofacial pressure ulcers under noninvasive positive pressure ventilation. Methods: A total of 287 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who were treated with noninvasive positive pressure ventilation in our hospital from January 2017 to December 2018 were assessed with Waterlaw scale, Braden scale and Norton scale within 2 hours before or after noninvasive positive pressure ventilation. The area under the ROC curve, predictive value, critical value, sensitivity coefficient and specificity coefficient of the three pressure ulcer assessment tools were calculated. Results: There were 56 patients (19.5%) with nasofacial pressure ulcers. The scores of patients without nasofacial pressure ulcers on Waterlaw scale were significantly lower than those of patients with nasofacial pressure ulcers. The scores of Braden scale and Norton scale were significantly higher than those of patients with nasofacial pressure ulcers (P<0.001). The area under the ROC curve of Waterlaw scale, Braden scale and Norton scale was 0.769, 0.710 and 0.693, respectively, with statistical significance (P<0.05). The area under the curve of Waterlaw scale was significantly higher than that of Braden scale and Norton scale (Z=2.263 and 2.381, P<0.05). The positive and negative predictive values of the three scales were 61.191 and 89.082; 37.166 and 87.091; and 40.893 and 86.886, respectively. The critical scores were 23, 14 and 10, and the sensitivity and specificity coefficients were 53.570 and 91.770; 51.790 and 78.790; and 48.210 and 83.120, respectively. Conclusion: Waterlaw scale, Braden scale and Norton scale can predict the occurrence of nasofacial pressure ulcers in patients with noninvasive positive pressure ventilation to a certain extent. The predictive ability of Waterlaw scale was relatively high, while its sensitivity was relatively low.
Keywords:
non-invasive positive pressure ventilation; facial pressure ulcer; Waterlaw scale; Braden scale; Norton scale; prediction