Examining the validity of pressure ulcer risk assessment scales: a replication study
Gould, Dinah and Goldstone, Len and Kelly, Daniel and Gammon, John (2004) Examining the validity of pressure ulcer risk assessment scales: a replication study. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 41 (3). pp. 331-339. ISSN 0020-7489
Full text is not in this repository.
Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2003.10.005
This item is available in the Library Catalogue
Risk assessment scales (RASs) intended to identify patients most at risk of developing pressure ulcers have been widely used for many years. Numerous studies have evaluated their predictive validity but potential bias has been inherent in the design of all. To overcome these problems a simulation study was conducted in which clinical nurses were asked to identify the degree of risk experienced by four patients employing the three RASs discussed most frequently in the literature (Norton, Braden and Waterlow Scores). These findings were compared with nurses’ clinical judgment rated on a visual analogue scale. The simulations consisted of high-resolution photographs accompanied by case studies of the patients. The nurses’ scores were compared to estimates of risk generated by an expert panel. Nurses’ clinical judgment agreed much more closely with expert opinion than any of the RASs. A replication study was undertaken to confirm these findings. One hundred and fifteen nurses participated in replication. Again the nurses’ clinical judgment matched expert opinion much more closely than the results of the RASs. Replication also drew attention to a number of methodological issues which deserve consideration when using simulation to test the effectiveness of clinical tools and the need to establish adequate measures of external validity whenever use of this method is contemplated.
|Research Areas:||School of Health and Education > Health & Education|
|Citations on ISI Web of Science:||13|
|Deposited On:||10 Dec 2009 04:36|
|Last Modified:||09 Jan 2014 08:46|
Repository staff and depositor only: item control page
Full text downloads (NB count will be zero if no full text documents are attached to the record)
Downloads per month over the past year