Jiyeon Kang1, Yeon Jin Jeong2, Jiwon Hong3. 1. College of Nursing, Dong-A University, Busan, Korea. 2. Department of Nursing, Dongju College, Busan, Korea. 3. College of Nursing, Dong-A University, Busan, Korea. superj419@naver.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to assign weights for subscales and items of the Post-Intensive Care Syndrome questionnaire and suggest optimal cut-off values for screening unplanned hospital readmissions of critical care survivors. METHODS: Seventeen experts participated in an analytic hierarchy process for weight assignment. Participants for cut-off analysis were 240 survivors who had been admitted to intensive care units for more than 48 hours in three cities in Korea. We assessed participants using the 18-item Post-Intensive Care Syndrome questionnaire, generated receiver operating characteristic curves, and analysed cut-off values for unplanned readmission based on sensitivity, specificity, and positive likelihood ratios. RESULTS: Cognitive, physical, and mental subscale weights were 1.13, 0.95, and 0.92, respectively. Incidence of unplanned readmission was 25.4%. Optimal cut-off values were 23.00 for raw scores and 23.73 for weighted scores (total score 54.00), with an area of under the curve (AUC) of .933 and .929, respectively. There was no significant difference in accuracy for original and weighted scores. CONCLUSION: The optimal cut-off value accuracy is excellent for screening of unplanned readmissions. We recommend that nurses use the Post-Intensive Care Syndrome Questionnaire to screen for readmission risk or evaluating relevant interventions for critical care survivors.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to assign weights for subscales and items of the Post-Intensive Care Syndrome questionnaire and suggest optimal cut-off values for screening unplanned hospital readmissions of critical care survivors. METHODS: Seventeen experts participated in an analytic hierarchy process for weight assignment. Participants for cut-off analysis were 240 survivors who had been admitted to intensive care units for more than 48 hours in three cities in Korea. We assessed participants using the 18-item Post-Intensive Care Syndrome questionnaire, generated receiver operating characteristic curves, and analysed cut-off values for unplanned readmission based on sensitivity, specificity, and positive likelihood ratios. RESULTS: Cognitive, physical, and mental subscale weights were 1.13, 0.95, and 0.92, respectively. Incidence of unplanned readmission was 25.4%. Optimal cut-off values were 23.00 for raw scores and 23.73 for weighted scores (total score 54.00), with an area of under the curve (AUC) of .933 and .929, respectively. There was no significant difference in accuracy for original and weighted scores. CONCLUSION: The optimal cut-off value accuracy is excellent for screening of unplanned readmissions. We recommend that nurses use the Post-Intensive Care Syndrome Questionnaire to screen for readmission risk or evaluating relevant interventions for critical care survivors.
Authors: Dale M Needham; Judy Davidson; Henry Cohen; Ramona O Hopkins; Craig Weinert; Hannah Wunsch; Christine Zawistowski; Anita Bemis-Dougherty; Susan C Berney; O Joseph Bienvenu; Susan L Brady; Martin B Brodsky; Linda Denehy; Doug Elliott; Carl Flatley; Andrea L Harabin; Christina Jones; Deborah Louis; Wendy Meltzer; Sean R Muldoon; Jeffrey B Palmer; Christiane Perme; Marla Robinson; David M Schmidt; Elizabeth Scruth; Gayle R Spill; C Porter Storey; Marta Render; John Votto; Maurene A Harvey Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Dale M Needham; Kristin A Sepulveda; Victor D Dinglas; Caroline M Chessare; Lisa Aronson Friedman; Clifton O Bingham; Alison E Turnbull Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2017-11-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Alison E Turnbull; Anahita Rabiee; Wesley E Davis; Mohamed Farhan Nasser; Venkat Reddy Venna; Rohini Lolitha; Ramona O Hopkins; O Joseph Bienvenu; Karen A Robinson; Dale M Needham Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2016-07 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Claudia Fischer; Hester F Lingsma; Perla J Marang-van de Mheen; Dionne S Kringos; Niek S Klazinga; Ewout W Steyerberg Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-11-07 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Robert P Kosilek; Sebastian E Baumeister; Till Ittermann; Matthias Gründling; Frank M Brunkhorst; Stephan B Felix; Peter Abel; Sigrun Friesecke; Christian Apfelbacher; Magdalena Brandl; Konrad Schmidt; Wolfgang Hoffmann; Carsten O Schmidt; Jean-François Chenot; Henry Völzke; Jochen S Gensichen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-09-20 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Nazir I Lone; Michael A Gillies; Catriona Haddow; Richard Dobbie; Kathryn M Rowan; Sarah H Wild; Gordon D Murray; Timothy S Walsh Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2016-07-15 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Bronagh Blackwood; Mike Clarke; Danny F McAuley; Peter J McGuigan; John C Marshall; Louise Rose Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2014-04-15 Impact factor: 21.405