ABSTRACT
Objective:The evidence-based and Delphi methods were used to construct the exercise program for hospitalized patients with diabetes foot to provide guidance for clinical practice.Methods:Evidence on exercise management of diabetic foot patients was systematically searched from BMJ Best Practice, UpToDate, Registered Nurses′ Association of Ontario and other domestic and foreign databases and professional association websites. The retrieval period was from the establishment of the database to April 2021. The quality of the included literature was independently evaluated, and the evidence of the literature meeting the quality standards was extracted and summarized to form the first draft of exercise program for inpatients with diabetic foot. After two rounds of Delphi expert letter consultation, the program items were revised, and the final draft of the exercise program for inpatients with diabetic foot suitable for clinical practice was formed.Results:The effective recovery rate of the two rounds of expert correspondence questionnaire both were15/15. The expert authority coefficient was 0.865 and 0.895 respectively. And the Kendall coordination coefficient was 0.232 and 0.291 (both P<0.01). An exercise program for inpatients with diabetic foot had been formed, including 5 modules(exercise evaluation, exercise prescription, exercise monitoring, post-exercise evaluation and exercise management), 12 items and 40 operational items. Conclusions:The exercise program for inpatients with diabetic foot constructed in this study is scientific and clinically applicable, which provide scientific guidance for clinical medical staff to carry out exercise practice.
ABSTRACT
Objective@#To translate the English version of the Pressure Ulcer Risk Primary or Secondary Evaluation Tool (PURPOSE T) into Chinese and evaluate its reliability and validity.@*Methods@#Firstly, PURPOSE T was translated and revised, cross-cultural debugging, and then 213 inpatients from Jiangsu University Affiliated Hospital from November 2017 to May 2018 were selected for investigation. Choosing the total item content validity index (S-CVI/Ave) and the content validity of the item level content validity index (I-CVI) to evaluate content validity, using the Chinese version of the Braden scale as the criterion to measure the validity-related validity of the Chinese version of PURPOSE T. The internal consistency reliability Cronbach α coefficient, the assessor reliability, and the test-retest reliability measure the reliability.@*Results@#The Chinese version of PURPOSET S-CVI was 0.967; I-CVI was 0.6-1.0, The coefficients between PURPOSET and Braden scale in mobility, activity ability, perception status, nutritional status and humidity were 0.600, 0.661, 0.699, 0.519, and 0.783. The PURPOSET and Braden scales had a correlation coefficient of 0.407 in predicting the risk of pressure injury. The Cronbach α=0.859 of the evaluation tool, the assessor reliability were 0.87 and the correlation coefficient of the 2 measurements of the test-retest reliability were 0.91.@*Conclusions@#The Chinese version of PURPOSET has good reliability and validity and can be used as a risk assessment tool for pressure injury in hospitalized patients in China.
ABSTRACT
Objective To translate the English version of the Pressure Ulcer Risk Primary or Secondary Evaluation Tool (PURPOSE T) into Chinese and evaluate its reliability and validity. Methods Firstly, PURPOSE T was translated and revised, cross-cultural debugging, and then 213 inpatients from Jiangsu University Affiliated Hospital from November 2017 to May 2018 were selected for investigation. Choosing the total item content validity index (S-CVI/Ave) and the content validity of the item level content validity index (I-CVI) to evaluate content validity, using the Chinese version of the Braden scale as the criterion to measure the validity-related validity of the Chinese version of PURPOSE T. The internal consistency reliability Cronbach α coefficient, the assessor reliability, and the test-retest reliability measure the reliability. Results The Chinese version of PURPOSET S-CVI was 0.967;I-CVI was 0.6-1.0, The coefficients between PURPOSET and Braden scale in mobility, activity ability, perception status, nutritional status and humidity were 0.600, 0.661, 0.699, 0.519, and 0.783. The PURPOSET and Braden scales had a correlation coefficient of 0.407 in predicting the risk of pressure injury. The Cronbach α=0.859 of the evaluation tool, the assessor reliability were 0.87 and the correlation coefficient of the 2 measurements of the test-retest reliability were 0.91. Conclusions The Chinese version of PURPOSET has good reliability and validity and can be used as a risk assessment tool for pressure injury in hospitalized patients in China.