메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
김성렬 (전북대학교) 유성희 (전남대학교) 신용순 (창원대학교) 전지윤 (서울아산병원) 김준우 (서울아산병원) 강수정 (서울아산병원) 최혜숙 (서울아산병원) 이혜림 (서울아산병원) 안영희 (서울아산병원)
저널정보
한국성인간호학회 성인간호학회지 성인간호학회지 제25권 1호
발행연도
2013.2
수록면
24 - 32 (9page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
Purpose: The aim of the study was to identify the most appropriate fall-risk assessment tool for neurological patients in an acute care setting. Methods: This descriptive study compared the reliability and validity of three fall-risk assessment tools (Morse Fall Scale, MFS; St Thomas’s Risk Assessment Tool in Falling Elderly Inpatients, STRATIFY; Hendrich II Fall Risk Model, HFRM II). We assessed patients who were admitted to the Department of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Rehabilitation at Asan Medical Center between July 1 and October 31, 2011, using a constructive questionnaire including general and clinical characteristics, and each item from the three tools. We analyzed inter-rater reliability with the kappa value, and the sensitivity, specificity, predictive value, and the area under the curve (AUC) of the three tools. Results: The analysis included 1,026 patients, and 32 falls occurred during this study. Inter-rater reliability was above 80% in all three tools. and the sensitivity was 50.0% (MFS), 84.4%(STRATIFY), and 59.4%(HFRM II). The AUC of the STRATIFY was 82.8. However, when the cutoff point was regulated as not 50 but 40 points, the AUC of the MFS was higher at 83.7. Conclusion: These results suggest that the STRATIFY may be the best tool for predicting falls for acute neurological patients.

목차

서론
연구방법
연구결과
논의
결론 및 제언
REFERENCES

참고문헌 (1)

참고문헌 신청

이 논문의 저자 정보

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2014-510-003046204