ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors for peripheral intravenous catheter-related phlebitis in adult patients. METHOD: This is a post hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial, totaling 1,319 patients. Demographic and clinical variables related to therapy and phlebitis were investigated. For data analysis, frequencies, measures of central tendency and dispersion were calculated, and Pearson's chi-square test and Fisher's exact test were used, with logistic regression, ROC curve, and Odds Ratio calculation (95% confidence interval; 5% significance level) being implemented. RESULTS: Of the 1,319 participants, 80 (6.1%) developed phlebitis. The following were associated with the occurrence of phlebitis: reduced mobility (p = 0.015), family history of deep vein thrombosis (p = 0.05), catheterization of veins on the back of the hand (p = 0.012), pain (p < 0.01), Amoxicillin-Potassium Clavulanate (p = 0.015), and Omeprazole Sodium (p = 0.029). CONCLUSION: Risk factors for phlebitis involved intrinsic and extrinsic factors to the patient, indicating preventive nursing interventions such as promoting patient mobility, not catheterizing veins in the dorsal arch of the hand, cautious infusion of risk drugs, and valuing pain complaints.
Subject(s)
Catheterization, Peripheral , Phlebitis , Adult , Catheterization, Peripheral/adverse effects , Catheters/adverse effects , Humans , Pain/etiology , Phlebitis/epidemiology , Phlebitis/etiology , Risk FactorsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the validity and reliability of the Johns Hopkins Fall Risk Assessment Tool (JH-FRAT), which assesses the risk of falls in hospitalized inpatients. METHOD: Study with 297 patients at a hospital in São Paulo, using retrospective data form 2014. Validity was assessed by accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value - PPV and negative predictive value - NPV) and discriminant analysis (comparison of patients with and without falls in relation to the scale items and comparison of previous risk situations in relation to the injury). The χ2 test and Fisher's exact test were used. Reliability was assessed by reproducibility between methods and interobserver test-retest comparison in a subsample of 60 patients. We used the Kappa, quadratic weighted Kappa and PABAK statistics. RESULTS: Sensitivity was 97.0%, specificity was 6%, PPV was 36.2% and NPV was 90.6%. Five of the eight items of the scale and the overall classification showed risk discrimination capability (p < 0.050). The risk of previous situations did not discriminate the injury resulting from the falls (p = 0.557). Reproducibility between methods was substantial (PABAK = 0.71). The interobserver reproducibility ranged between items (PABAK 0.25 to 1.00) and was substantial to the overall risk classification (PABAK = 0.71). CONCLUSION: JH-FRAT showed validity and reliability expected of a screening tool for risk of falls, and it can contribute to the implementation of fall management strategies in hospitals.
OBJETIVO: Avaliar a validade e a confiabilidade da escala Johns Hopkins Fall Risk Assessment Tool (JH-FRAT) para avaliação do risco de quedas em pacientes hospitalizados. MÉTODO: Estudo retroativo com 297 pacientes de um hospital privado de São Paulo usando dados de 2014. A validade foi avaliada por meio da acurácia (sensibilidade, especificidade, valores preditivos positivo - VPP e negativo - VPN), da validade de critério, verificando-se as associações entre a classificação do risco pelas escalas JH-FRAT e Morse, e da análise discriminante (comparação dos pacientes com e sem quedas em relação aos itens da escala e verificação de situações prévias de risco em relação ao dano ocorrido). Foram utilizados os testes de associação χ2. A confiabilidade foi avaliada por meio da reprodutibilidade teste-reteste interobservadores, usando as estatísticas Kappa ponderado quadrático e prevalence-adjusted and bias-adjusted Kappa (PABAK). RESULTADOS: A sensibilidade foi de 97,0%, a especificidade, 14,6%, o VPP, 36,2%, e o VPN, 90,6%. A análise de critério mostrou associação (p < 0,0001) entre as avaliações pelas duas escalas. Cinco dos oito itens da escala e a classificação geral mostraram capacidade de discriminação do risco (p < 0,050). A reprodutibilidade interobservadores variou entre itens (PABAK de 0,25 a 1,00) e foi substancial na classificação do risco global (PABAK = 0,71). CONCLUSÃO: A JH-FRAT apresentou validade e confiabilidade esperadas para um instrumento de triagem do risco de quedas, podendo contribuir na aplicação de estratégias para a gestão de quedas em hospitais.
Subject(s)
Accidental Falls/statistics & numerical data , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Risk Assessment/standards , Surveys and Questionnaires/standards , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Brazil , Cross-Cultural Comparison , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Reference Values , Reproducibility of Results , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment/methods , Risk Factors , Sex Factors , Socioeconomic FactorsABSTRACT
RESUMO: Objetivo: Avaliar a validade e a confiabilidade da escala Johns Hopkins Fall Risk Assessment Tool (JH-FRAT) para avaliação do risco de quedas em pacientes hospitalizados. Método: Estudo retroativo com 297 pacientes de um hospital privado de São Paulo usando dados de 2014. A validade foi avaliada por meio da acurácia (sensibilidade, especificidade, valores preditivos positivo - VPP e negativo - VPN), da validade de critério, verificando-se as associações entre a classificação do risco pelas escalas JH-FRAT e Morse, e da análise discriminante (comparação dos pacientes com e sem quedas em relação aos itens da escala e verificação de situações prévias de risco em relação ao dano ocorrido). Foram utilizados os testes de associação χ2. A confiabilidade foi avaliada por meio da reprodutibilidade teste-reteste interobservadores, usando as estatísticas Kappa ponderado quadrático e prevalence-adjusted and bias-adjusted Kappa (PABAK). Resultados: A sensibilidade foi de 97,0%, a especificidade, 14,6%, o VPP, 36,2%, e o VPN, 90,6%. A análise de critério mostrou associação (p < 0,0001) entre as avaliações pelas duas escalas. Cinco dos oito itens da escala e a classificação geral mostraram capacidade de discriminação do risco (p < 0,050). A reprodutibilidade interobservadores variou entre itens (PABAK de 0,25 a 1,00) e foi substancial na classificação do risco global (PABAK = 0,71). Conclusão: A JH-FRAT apresentou validade e confiabilidade esperadas para um instrumento de triagem do risco de quedas, podendo contribuir na aplicação de estratégias para a gestão de quedas em hospitais.
ABSTRACT: Objective: To evaluate the validity and reliability of the Johns Hopkins Fall Risk Assessment Tool (JH-FRAT), which assesses the risk of falls in hospitalized inpatients. Method: Study with 297 patients at a hospital in São Paulo, using retrospective data form 2014. Validity was assessed by accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value - PPV and negative predictive value - NPV) and discriminant analysis (comparison of patients with and without falls in relation to the scale items and comparison of previous risk situations in relation to the injury). The χ2 test and Fisher's exact test were used. Reliability was assessed by reproducibility between methods and interobserver test-retest comparison in a subsample of 60 patients. We used the Kappa, quadratic weighted Kappa and PABAK statistics. Results: Sensitivity was 97.0%, specificity was 6%, PPV was 36.2% and NPV was 90.6%. Five of the eight items of the scale and the overall classification showed risk discrimination capability (p < 0.050). The risk of previous situations did not discriminate the injury resulting from the falls (p = 0.557). Reproducibility between methods was substantial (PABAK = 0.71). The interobserver reproducibility ranged between items (PABAK 0.25 to 1.00) and was substantial to the overall risk classification (PABAK = 0.71). Conclusion: JH-FRAT showed validity and reliability expected of a screening tool for risk of falls, and it can contribute to the implementation of fall management strategies in hospitals.