主管:国家卫生健康委员会
主办:国家卫生健康委医院管理研究所
中国科技核心期刊(中国科技论文统计源期刊)
中国科学引文数据库(CSCD)核心库期刊
《中文核心期刊要目总览》核心期刊

中国护理管理 ›› 2022, Vol. 22 ›› Issue (6): 888-892.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-1756.2022.06.017

• 护理安全 • 上一篇    下一篇

两种跌倒评估工具在住院患儿跌倒风险评估中的应用比较

范芳莲 李红丽 陶晶晶   

  1. 淮安市第二人民医院儿科,223001 江苏省淮安市
  • 出版日期:2022-06-15 发布日期:2022-06-30
  • 通讯作者: 李红丽,本科,主管护师,E-mail:847907615@qq.com
  • 作者简介:范芳莲,本科,主管护师,护士长

Comparison of two fall assessment tools in fall risk assessment of inpatients in pediatric department

FAN Fanglian, LI Hongli, TAO Jingjing   

  1. Department of Pediatrics, Huai'an Second People's Hospital, Huai'an, Jiangsu province, 223001, China
  • Online:2022-06-15 Published:2022-06-30
  • Contact: E-mail:847907615@qq.com

摘要: 目的:比较住院患儿跌倒风险评分与汉化版Humpty Dumpty跌倒量表在住院患儿跌倒风险评估中的应用效果。方法:采用便利抽样法,选取746例住院患儿为研究对象,分别使用两种量表对其进行跌倒风险评估,分析住院患儿跌倒风险评分的信度、效度,比较两种量表的跌倒高风险筛查率、高风险患儿跌倒发生率、预测效度,并分析两种量表各条目的优势比。结果:746例患儿研究期间共有19例(2.55%)发生跌倒,住院患儿跌倒风险评分的高风险筛查率为42.90%,高风险患儿跌倒发生率为5.9%,敏感度为1.000,特异度为0.586;汉化版Humpty Dumpty跌倒量表的高风险筛查率为63.54%,高风险患儿跌倒发生率为3.6%,敏感度为0.895,特异度为0.371。两种量表的高风险筛查率差异有统计学意义(P<0.001)。结论:住院患儿跌倒风险评分具有良好的信度、效度,较汉化版Humpty Dumpty跌倒量表预测效能更好,条目设置更合理,更适合住院患儿的跌倒风险评估。

关键词: 住院患儿;跌倒;风险评估;汉化版Humpty Dumpty跌倒量表;信度;效度

Abstract: Objective: To compare the application effects of the fall risk score of hospitalized children and the Chinese version of Humpty Dumpty Fall Scale (HDFS) in pediatrics. Methods: Totally 746 hospitalized children in pediatric department were selected by convenience sampling method. Their fall risk was assessed by the fall risk score of hospitalized children and the Chinese version of HDFS. We analyzed the reliability and validity of the fall risk score of hospitalized children, compared the high-risk fall screening rate, high-risk fall incidence rate and predictive validity of the two scales, and analyzed the odds ratio of each item of the two scales. Results: Totally 19 (2.55%) falls occurred. For the fall risk score of hospitalized children, the high-risk screening rate was 42.90%, the high-risk falling rate was 5.9%, sensitivity was 1.000 and specificity was 0.586. For the Chinese version of HDFS, the high-risk screening rate was 63.54%, the high-risk falling rate was 3.6%, the sensitivity rate was 0.895 and specificity was 0.371. There was a significant difference in high-risk screening rates between the two scales (P<0.001). Conclusion: The fall risk score of hospitalized children has good reliability and validity. Compared with the Chinese version of HDFS, it has better prediction efficiency, a more reasonable item setting, and is more suitable for the fall risk assessment of hospitalized children in pediatrics.

Key words: hospitalized children; fall; risk assessment; Chinese version of Humpty Dumpty Fall Scale; reliability; validity

中图分类号:  R47,R197