We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Observational Study
A Novel Scale to Assess Humidification during Noninvasive Ventilation: A Prospective Observational Study.
OBJECTIVE: To develop a novel scale to assess humidification during noninvasive ventilation (NIV).
METHODS: This study was performed in an ICU of a teaching hospital. Three ICU practitioners with more than 10 years of clinical experience developed an oral humidification scale with a range of 1-4 points. Each studied the current literature on humidification and examined 50 images of mouths of NIV patients with different levels of humidification. Then, through discussion, a consensus scale was developed. Next, 10 practitioners and 33 NIV patients were recruited to validate the scale. Finally, the patients rated the dryness of their mouths using the 1-4 visual scale just after the practitioners' assessment. Talking and discussion were forbidden during the assessment, and the scorers were blinded to each other.
RESULTS: We performed 36 assessments in 33 NIV patients. Three patients were assessed twice each more than 2 days apart. The interitem correlation coefficients between the 10 practitioners ranged from 0.748 to 0.917. Fleiss's kappa statistic was 0.516, indicating moderate agreement among practitioners. Of the 33 patients, 5 (15%) were unable to make an assessment using the 1-4 visual scale. Among the remainder, 55.7% provided scores that matched those given by the practitioners; 13.7% of scores were 1 point higher than that rated by the practitioners, and 20.7% were 1 point lower. Only 10% were beyond a 1-point difference. The kappa coefficient was 0.483 between patients and practitioners.
CONCLUSIONS: The oral humidification scale showed moderate agreement between practitioners. It was also highly accurate in reflecting the level of humidification assessed by patients.
METHODS: This study was performed in an ICU of a teaching hospital. Three ICU practitioners with more than 10 years of clinical experience developed an oral humidification scale with a range of 1-4 points. Each studied the current literature on humidification and examined 50 images of mouths of NIV patients with different levels of humidification. Then, through discussion, a consensus scale was developed. Next, 10 practitioners and 33 NIV patients were recruited to validate the scale. Finally, the patients rated the dryness of their mouths using the 1-4 visual scale just after the practitioners' assessment. Talking and discussion were forbidden during the assessment, and the scorers were blinded to each other.
RESULTS: We performed 36 assessments in 33 NIV patients. Three patients were assessed twice each more than 2 days apart. The interitem correlation coefficients between the 10 practitioners ranged from 0.748 to 0.917. Fleiss's kappa statistic was 0.516, indicating moderate agreement among practitioners. Of the 33 patients, 5 (15%) were unable to make an assessment using the 1-4 visual scale. Among the remainder, 55.7% provided scores that matched those given by the practitioners; 13.7% of scores were 1 point higher than that rated by the practitioners, and 20.7% were 1 point lower. Only 10% were beyond a 1-point difference. The kappa coefficient was 0.483 between patients and practitioners.
CONCLUSIONS: The oral humidification scale showed moderate agreement between practitioners. It was also highly accurate in reflecting the level of humidification assessed by patients.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Catastrophic Antiphospholipid Syndrome: A Review of Current Evidence and Future Management Practices.Curēus 2024 September
Paroxysmal Nocturnal Hemoglobinuria, Pathophysiology, Diagnostics, and Treatment.Transfusion Medicine and Hemotherapy 2024 October
Safety of anaesthesia techniques in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy: a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials.Anaesthesia 2024 October 22
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app