Value of pressure injury assessment scales for patients in the intensive care unit: Systematic review and diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis

被引:27
|
作者
Zhang, Yi [1 ,4 ]
Zhuang, Yiyu [2 ]
Shen, Jiantong [3 ,4 ]
Chen, Xianggping [1 ]
Wen, Qiuyue [4 ]
Jiang, Qi [4 ]
Lao, Yuewen [1 ]
机构
[1] Zhejiang Univ, Sir Run Run Shaw Hosp, Dept Intens Care Unit, Med Coll, Hangzhou 311500, Peoples R China
[2] Zhejiang Univ, Sir Run Run Shaw Hosp, Dept Nursing, Med Coll, Hangzhou 311500, Peoples R China
[3] Huzhou Univ, Chinese Cochrane Ctr, Branch Ctr, Huzhou 313000, Peoples R China
[4] Huzhou Univ, Huzhou Cent Hosp, Sch Med, 759 East 2nd Rd, Huzhou 313000, Peoples R China
关键词
Risk assessment scale; Intensive care unit; Pressure injury; Meta-analysis; RISK-ASSESSMENT-SCALES; PREDICTIVE-VALIDITY; BRADEN SCALE; SORE RISK; ULCERS; RELIABILITY; VALIDATION;
D O I
10.1016/j.iccn.2020.103009
中图分类号
R47 [护理学];
学科分类号
1011 ;
摘要
Objectives: To review and examine the evidence of the value of pressure injury risk assessment scales in intensive care patients. Research methodology: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, China Biomedical Literature Service System, VIP Database and CNIK from inception to February 2019. Two reviewers independently assessed articles' eligibility and risk of bias using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-II (QUADAS-2). We used a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristics (HSROC) model to conduct the meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy. Result: Twenty-four studies were included, involving 16 scales and 15,199 patients in intensive care set-tings. Results indicated that the top four risk assessment scales were the Cubbin & Jackson Index (SEN = 0.84, SPE = 0.84, AUC = 0.90), the EVRUCI scale (SEN = 0.84, SPE = 0.68, AUC = 0.82), the Braden scale (SEN = 0.78, SPE = 0.61, AUC = 0.78), the Waterlow scale (SEN = 0.63, SPE = 0.46, AUC = 0.56). The Norton scale and the other eleven scales were tested in less than two studies and need to be further researched. Conclusion: The Braden scale, most frequently used in hospitals, is not the best risk assessment tool for critically ill patients. The Cubbin & Jackson Index has good diagnostic test accuracy. However, low quality of evidence and important heterogeneity were observed. (c) 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Safety and efficacy of routine diagnostic test reduction interventions in patients admitted to the intensive care unit: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Hooper, Katherine P.
    Anstey, Matthew H.
    Litton, Edward
    [J]. ANAESTHESIA AND INTENSIVE CARE, 2021, 49 (01) : 23 - 34
  • [2] Acute kidney injury in burn patients admitted to the intensive care unit: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Folkestad, Torgeir
    Brurberg, Kjetil Gundro
    Nordhuus, Kine Marie
    Tveiten, Christine Kooy
    Guttormsen, Anne Berit
    Os, Ingrid
    Beitland, Sigrid
    [J]. CRITICAL CARE, 2020, 24 (01)
  • [3] Acute kidney injury in burn patients admitted to the intensive care unit: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Torgeir Folkestad
    Kjetil Gundro Brurberg
    Kine Marie Nordhuus
    Christine Kooy Tveiten
    Anne Berit Guttormsen
    Ingrid Os
    Sigrid Beitland
    [J]. Critical Care, 24
  • [4] Vasoconstrictor Agent Administration as a Risk Factor for Pressure Injury Development in Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Tang, Wen
    Li, Ai-Ping
    Zhang, Wan-Qing
    Hu, Shi-Qi
    Shen, Wang-Qin
    Chen, Hong-Lin
    [J]. ADVANCES IN WOUND CARE, 2023, 12 (10) : 560 - 573
  • [5] HALOPERIDOL FOR DELIRIUM IN INTENSIVE CARE UNIT PATIENTS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS
    Rivera, Andre
    Araujo, Beatriz
    Dagostim, Caroline Serafim
    Blackman, Antoinette Oliveira
    [J]. CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 2024, 52
  • [6] Diagnostic test accuracy: methods for systematic review and meta-analysis
    Campbell, Jared M.
    Klugar, Miloslav
    Ding, Sandrine
    Carmody, Dennis P.
    Hakonsen, Sasja J.
    Jadotte, Yuri T.
    White, Sarahlouise
    Munn, Zachary
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE-BASED HEALTHCARE, 2015, 13 (03) : 154 - 162
  • [7] The risk assessment tool for intensive care unit readmission: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Long, Jianying
    Wang, Min
    Li, Wenrui
    Cheng, Jie
    Yuan, Mengyuan
    Zhong, Mingming
    Zhang, Zhigang
    Zhang, Caiyun
    [J]. INTENSIVE AND CRITICAL CARE NURSING, 2023, 76
  • [8] APACHE scoring system and pressure injury risk for intensive care patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Tang, Wen
    Zha, Man-li
    Zhang, Wan-Qing
    Hu, Shi-Qi
    Chen, Hong-Lin
    [J]. WOUND REPAIR AND REGENERATION, 2022, 30 (04) : 498 - 508
  • [9] The predictive value of confusion assessment method-intensive care unit and intensive care delirium screening checklist for delirium in critically ill patients in the intensive care unit: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Diao, Yujie
    Yu, Xiaomin
    Zhang, Qin
    Chen, Xiaoli
    [J]. NURSING IN CRITICAL CARE, 2024,
  • [10] Diagnostic accuracy of respiratory muscle assessments to predict weaning outcomes in the intensive care unit (ICU): a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Poddighe, D.
    Van Hollebeke, M.
    Choudhary, Y. Qaiser
    Campos, D. Ribeiro
    Hermans, G.
    Gosselink, R.
    Langer, D.
    [J]. EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL, 2022, 60