Anita K Pyykkö1, Tero I Ala-Kokko2, Jouko J Laurila2, Jouko Miettunen3, Maarit Finnberg2, Maija Hentinen4. 1. Department of Nursing and Health Administration, PL 5300 , University of Oulu, 90014, Oulu, Finland. anita.pyykko@diak.fi. 2. Department of Anesthesiology, PL 21 University of Oulu, 90029, Oulu, Finland. 3. Department of Psychiatry, PL 26 University of Oulu, 90029, Oulu, Finland. 4. Department of Nursing and Health Administration, PL 5300 , University of Oulu, 90014, Oulu, Finland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To validate a new Intensive Care Nursing Scoring System (ICNSS). DESIGN: Retrospective data collection. SETTING: Adult 19-bed intensive care unit (ICU) in a tertiary care university hospital. PATIENTS: A total of 1,538 patient records of which 30 documents were included in the validation. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Data included admission scores of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) and the Simplified Acute Physiology Scores II (SAPS II), daily Therapeutic Intervention Scores (TISS) and ICNSS scores. Data were compared using Spearman's correlation, t-test and chi-square test. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis was used to assess the ability of ICNSS and TISS to predict mortality. Intra-class correlation, percentage agreement and kappa statistics were used to test the validity of given scores. Nursing workload assessment using ICNSS showed that medical and emergency-operated patients caused a greater nursing workload than electively operated patients (p<0.001). Six variables of the sub-scale that described vital function nursing accounted for 27.4% of the variation of SAPS II and for 37% of the variation of APACHE II. The ICNSS sub-scale of vital function nursing accounted for a ROC area of 0.91. In the validity of the given ICNSS scores, kappa was 0.81 and weighted kappa 0.82. CONCLUSIONS: Nursing workload varied between the different admission types. ICNSS explained a similar percentage of the variation of the admission scores of APACHE II and SAPSS II as TISS and discriminated between non-survivors and survivors. ICNSS is a suitable nursing workload instrument to be used with the TISS score.
OBJECTIVES: To validate a new Intensive Care Nursing Scoring System (ICNSS). DESIGN: Retrospective data collection. SETTING: Adult 19-bed intensive care unit (ICU) in a tertiary care university hospital. PATIENTS: A total of 1,538 patient records of which 30 documents were included in the validation. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Data included admission scores of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) and the Simplified Acute Physiology Scores II (SAPS II), daily Therapeutic Intervention Scores (TISS) and ICNSS scores. Data were compared using Spearman's correlation, t-test and chi-square test. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis was used to assess the ability of ICNSS and TISS to predict mortality. Intra-class correlation, percentage agreement and kappa statistics were used to test the validity of given scores. Nursing workload assessment using ICNSS showed that medical and emergency-operated patients caused a greater nursing workload than electively operated patients (p<0.001). Six variables of the sub-scale that described vital function nursing accounted for 27.4% of the variation of SAPS II and for 37% of the variation of APACHE II. The ICNSS sub-scale of vital function nursing accounted for a ROC area of 0.91. In the validity of the given ICNSS scores, kappa was 0.81 and weighted kappa 0.82. CONCLUSIONS: Nursing workload varied between the different admission types. ICNSS explained a similar percentage of the variation of the admission scores of APACHE II and SAPSS II as TISS and discriminated between non-survivors and survivors. ICNSS is a suitable nursing workload instrument to be used with the TISS score.
Authors: Peter Andrews; Elie Azoulay; Massimo Antonelli; Laurent Brochard; Christian Brun-Buisson; Geoffrey Dobb; Jean-Yves Fagon; Herwig Gerlach; Johan Groeneveld; Jordi Mancebo; Philipp Metnitz; Stefano Nava; Jerome Pugin; Michael Pinsky; Peter Radermacher; Christian Richard; Robert Tasker; Benoit Vallet Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2005-02-18 Impact factor: 17.440