健康科学ジャーナル

  • ISSN: 1108-7366
  • ジャーナル h-index: 51
  • 雑誌引用スコア: 10.69
  • ジャーナルのインパクトファクター: 9.13
インデックス付き
  • Genamics JournalSeek
  • 中国国家知識基盤 (CNKI)
  • サイテファクター
  • シナール完了
  • シマゴ
  • 電子ジャーナルライブラリ
  • 研究ジャーナル索引作成ディレクトリ (DRJI)
  • EMケア
  • OCLC-WorldCat
  • 大学補助金委員会
  • ジュネーブ医学教育研究財団
  • ユーロパブ
  • Google スカラー
  • シェルパ・ロメオ
  • 秘密検索エンジン研究所
このページをシェアする

抽象的な

RAMSAY Sedation Scale and Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS): A Cross Sectional Study

Akram Rasheed, Mohammad Amirah, Mohammad Abdallah, Parameaswari PJ, Marwan Issa and Abdulrhman Alharthy

Background: Many sedation scales and tools have been developed and compared for validity in critically ill patients. Objective: The aim of this study is to compare the reliability of two sedation scales; RAMSAY sedation scale and Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) in the adult intensive care unit. Methods: 290 patients in intensive care unit were recruited for the study and were independently assessed for sedation effect by investigator and bedside nurses simultaneously using RAMSAY scale and RASS scale. Results: Agreement between the nurse and researcher scores on RAMSAY scale (weighted κ=0.449, p<0.001) indicating weak level of agreement. Agreement between the nurse and researcher on RASS scale (weighted κ=0.879, p<0.001) indicating strong level of agreement. Cronbach’s alpha analysis showed that 10 items of RASS had excellent level of internal consistency (α=0.989) compared to good level of internal consistency of RAMSAY scale (α =0.828). Conclusion: RASS showed excellent inter-rater agreement compared to weak inter-rater agreement of RAMSAY scale. The results also support that RASS has consistent agreement with clinical observation and practice among different observers. The results suggest that use of RASS is linked to more reliable modvigil assessment of sedation levels in the ICU.