IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/clnure/v31y2022i8p1438-1444.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Validation of a Risk Assessment Tool for Unplanned Endotracheal Extubation: An Observational Study

Author

Listed:
  • Ping Zhang
  • Li-Ping Liu

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to validate and determine the sensitivity and specificity of the risk assessment tool for unplanned endotracheal extubation. Unplanned endotracheal extubation is a common adverse event. The rate of unplanned endotracheal extubation is an indicator to measure patient safety and medical quality. This study was conducted in five intensive care units in a tertiary-A hospital. A total of 227 samples encounters were obtained from 147 unique patients. The content validity was 0.91, and the item content validity ranged from 0.80 to 1.00. Cronbach’s α was .58, the interrater reliability was .93. The area under the curve was 0.89 (95% CI [0.84, 0.94], p  

Suggested Citation

  • Ping Zhang & Li-Ping Liu, 2022. "Validation of a Risk Assessment Tool for Unplanned Endotracheal Extubation: An Observational Study," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 31(8), pages 1438-1444, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:clnure:v:31:y:2022:i:8:p:1438-1444
    DOI: 10.1177/10547738221088897
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10547738221088897
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/10547738221088897?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:clnure:v:31:y:2022:i:8:p:1438-1444. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.