高级检索
    包园, 王硕, 卓朗, 李文雪, 孟庆亚, 陈翠, 周芳. 成人重症患者疼痛评估工具转换模型研究[J]. 徐州医科大学学报, 2022, 42(5): 385-390. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2096-3882.2022.05.014
    引用本文: 包园, 王硕, 卓朗, 李文雪, 孟庆亚, 陈翠, 周芳. 成人重症患者疼痛评估工具转换模型研究[J]. 徐州医科大学学报, 2022, 42(5): 385-390. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2096-3882.2022.05.014
    shu
    Research on the conversion model of pain assessment tools in critical ill adults[J]. Journal of Xuzhou Medical University, 2022, 42(5): 385-390. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2096-3882.2022.05.014
    Citation: Research on the conversion model of pain assessment tools in critical ill adults[J]. Journal of Xuzhou Medical University, 2022, 42(5): 385-390. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.2096-3882.2022.05.014
    shu

    成人重症患者疼痛评估工具转换模型研究

    Research on the conversion model of pain assessment tools in critical ill adults

      摘要
    • 摘要: 目的探讨主观与客观疼痛评估工具得分在成人重症患者中的转换关系。方法采用方便抽样的方法选取2021年3月—10月入住徐州医科大学附属医院ICU的115例成人重症患者，分别用数字评分量表（NRS）、重症监护疼痛观察工具（CPOT）和中文版行为疼痛评估工具（BPS-C）在患者休息（70例）和接受疼痛性操作时（86例）进行疼痛评估，分析NRS与CPOT、BPS-C得分的相关性和转换关系。结果患者休息以及接受疼痛性操作时，CPOT与NRS得分均显著相关（P＜0.05），因此CPOT与NRS之间可建立直线回归方程：休息时CPOT=0.122+0.442×NRS（决定系数R2=0.452），接受疼痛性操作时CPOT=0.932＋0.486×NRS（R2=0.554）。患者休息以及接受疼痛性操作时，BPS-C与NRS得分均显著相关（P＜0.05），因此BPS-C与NRS之间可建立直线回归方程：休息时BPS-C=2.774＋0.415×NRS（R2=0.420），接受疼痛性操作时BPS-C=3.288＋0.519×NRS（R2=0.501）。结论NRS与CPOT、BPS-C得分之间均可通过直线回归方程进行转换，使成人重症患者的疼痛评估得分规范于同一标尺下，NRS与CPOT建立的回归方程拟合度更佳，CPOT更适合用于成人重症患者的疼痛评估。

       

      Abstract: ob＜x＞jective: To explore the conversion relationship between subjective and ob＜x＞jective pain assessment tool scores in critical ill adults. Methods: The convenience sampling method was used to select 115 critically ill adults admitted to the ICU of a large general hospital from March 2021 to October 2021.Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), Critical-care Observation Pain Tool (CPOT) and Behavioral Pain Scale-China (BPS-C) were used to assess patients’ pain at rest ( 70) and during painful procedure (85), the correlation and conversion relationship between NRS and CPOT as well as NRS and BPS-C were analyzed. Results: Regardless of the status of patients, CPOT scores were significantly correlated with NRS scores (rrest=0.500-0.789, P<0.05) (rprocedure=0.482-0.922, P<0.05), so the linear regression equation between CPOT and NRS can be established: CPOTrest=0.122+0.442×NRS(R2=0.452), CPOToperation=0.932+0.486×NRS(R2=0.554). Regardless of the status of patients, BPS scores were also significantly correlated with NRS scores (rrest=0.478-0.814, P<0.05) (rprocedure=0.440-0.983, P<0.05), so the linear regression equation between BPS and NRS can be established: BPSrest=2.774＋0.415×NRS(R2=0.420), BPSprocedure=3.288+0.519×NRS(R2=0.501). Conclusion：The linear regression equation can be used to convert the scores between NRS and CPOT as well as NRS and BPS, so that the pain assessment scores of critical ill adults can be standardized under the same scale. The regression equation established by NRS and CPOT has a better fit, and CPOT is more suitable for pain assessment in critically ill adults

       

      • HTML全文
      • 参考文献(0)
      • 相关文章
      • 施引文献
    • 资源附件(0)

    /

    返回文章
    返回